Guest lecturer at Yale fantasizes about shooting white people in the head

[laughing dog]

The implication of 'quote mining' is that something is taken out of context to imply something other than the author's or speaker's intention. I did not quote mine.

I did not say you quoted mined. Ms. Khiliani did not speak about a general theory of grief - her comments are in a specific context.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

One can wonder what motivates these people so interested in defending the honor of the white race?

How dare this individual woman with no power have bad thoughts about white people!

Pointing out that this one woman is a racist, and has so little power that she's a fucking guest lecturer at YALE, isn't defending the white race.

It is pointing out that she is a racist.

Because she is.

Your excusing her racism is "the soft bigotry of lower expectations." She's a minority, so you don't expect any better from her.

Since I'm not a racist, I expect better from her. Better as in "don't be a racist".

 

[Metaphor]

I did not say you quoted mined.

You said it was a mined quote. It is difficult to understand this charge since the question that prompted the paragraph and the answer were quoted in full, from a fully transcribed interview.

Ms. Khiliani did not speak about a general theory of grief - her comments are in a specific context.

Her comments were in the context of what she sees as the etiology of the mental problems of white people. She says white people's mental problems are the result of neuroses arising from repeating and believing "colonial lies". The mental problems of non-white people are from racism against them as well as individual neuroses.

Now, even though I think Khilanani is the kind of woman who has (or had) kept company with the neurotic white guilt liberals she is complaining about, and therefore some of her white clients may indeed have problems arising from their white guilt in the manner she claims, her sweeping generalisation of the etiology of white people's problems is unscientific, as well as hateful gaslighting.

But even though I think she is wrong about the etiology of white people's mental problems, that would make her therapy merely ineffective. But she's worse than wrong. She is genuinely hateful towards white people and I don't think somebody who hates white people can effectively minister to their mental health.

 

[untermensche]

One can wonder what motivates these people so interested in defending the honor of the white race?

How dare this individual woman with no power have bad thoughts about white people!

It is pointing out that she is a racist.

Yes, she had bad thoughts.

She did not construct racist institutions.

 

[Gospel]

I did not say you quoted mined.

You said it was a mined quote. It is difficult to understand this charge since the question that prompted the paragraph and the answer were quoted in full, from a fully transcribed interview.

Ms. Khiliani did not speak about a general theory of grief - her comments are in a specific context.

Her comments were in the context of what she sees as the etiology of the mental problems of white people. She says white people's mental problems are the result of neuroses arising from repeating and believing "colonial lies". The mental problems of non-white people are from racism against them as well as individual neuroses.

Now, even though I think Khilanani is the kind of woman who has (or had) kept company with the neurotic white guilt liberals she is complaining about, and therefore some of her white clients may indeed have problems arising from their white guilt in the manner she claims, her sweeping generalisation of the etiology of white people's problems is unscientific, as well as hateful gaslighting.

But even though I think she is wrong about the etiology of white people's mental problems, that would make her therapy merely ineffective. But she's worse than wrong. She is genuinely hateful towards white people and I don't think somebody who hates white people can effectively minister to their mental health.

I agree with you on her generalization being racist. The etiology of white people's mental problems is not exclusively linked to white guilt. You're proof of that.

 

[Metaphor]

I agree with you on her generalization being racist.

I didn't even call her racist. I believe she is racist, in the genuine, old-school definition of the word, but she isn't racist in the new woke definition, because she cannot be racist by that definition. And I don't think it's worth debating with woke believers over the use of the word racist, when her behaviour, whatever you call it, is a problem that she is culpable for and needs addressing.

The etiology of white people's mental problems is not exclusively linked to white guilt. You're proof of that.

I've got 99 problems and white guilt ain't any of them. But I'll reiterate: even though Khilanani would be wrong about her white guilt assumption if I were one of her patients (or indeed the large number of white people who are not white guilt liberals), maybe that would just make the therapy a waste of time and money, which I could get over. But the fact that she hates white people would be a greater concern to me.

I wouldn't get a quadruple bypass from a surgeon who said he hated white people, either.

 

[Trausti]

 

[Gospel]

Blah, that's a concept conservatives should be familiar with anyway. That being the whole party of God thing along with that original sin thing that they guilt-trip people into loving christ for thing.

 

[barbos]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

 

[Metaphor]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

It makes no difference to the woke. The woke already think you are born racist and carry the sins of your ancestors. What barrier is there in this ontology to carrying the sins of other people's ancestors?

The woke would count me as a racist white person (as all white people are), even though my ancestors were the downtrodden and invaded, not the colonisers. (Yes: the word 'slave' really did arise from Slav--though nobody has approached me on what kind of reparations I deserve from those fucking Ottomans).

 

[thebeave]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

 

[barbos]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

I find that unfair. Even today, excluding football players and students, there is virtually no blacks in Russia to be racist about.

 

[Gospel]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

Yall tripping. I give Russia props for not having state-enforced slavery of African's but I'll gladly lick a caramel-coated penis if no private citizens from Russia got blood on their hands.

I do agree that it is unfair to white people who had nothing to do with slavery catching blame though. I can empathize for a reason.

 

[Mumbles]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

I mean, which skin color people in the US is disproportionally freaking out over "Critical Race Theory" and "wokism" (a system of being against racism), which political party insists that a mere look at the history of black Americans will make white children feel inferior and guilt-wracked, who turned the mic off wen a vet discussed the history of Memorial Day (which was first marked by freedmen giving dead union POWs a proper burial)?

Seems to me like a lot of white people fully agree with her, and have been saying the exact same thing for years. So why are they also angry when an Indian-American woman notice it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

Yup, today's whites didn't have anything to do with:

• colonialism
• slavery
• Jim Crow
• red lining
• mortgage covenants
• privatization of public amenities
• reaction to the Civil Rights movement in the 50s/60s.
• high rate of imprisoning blacks over drug offenses 80s/90s

Today's whites are however, involved in a weird conspiracy or communal denial that these things have had no significant impact on the black community in the US, and claim the blacks need to just get over it.

 

[untermensche]

People that attack 'black lives matter' based on the conduct of a few members and ignore the members of the police that caused 'black lives matter' are still a problem.

 

[Gospel]

I wonder what she thinks about whites from countries which did not take part in colonialism and slavery - Eastern and Central Europe, Russia.

Same thing, of course. Modern day whites in the US didn't have anything to do with slavery and colonialism, yet she hates them. So, you don't actually have to have been involved. Just being the same skin color is enough.

Yup, today's whites didn't have anything to do with:

• colonialism
• slavery
• Jim Crow
• red lining
• mortgage covenants
• privatization of public amenities
• reaction to the Civil Rights movement in the 50s/60s.
• high rate of imprisoning blacks over drug offenses 80s/90s

Today's whites are however, involved in a weird conspiracy or communal denial that these things have had no significant impact on the black community in the US, and claim the blacks need to just get over it.

I'd also like to add to the list that many institutions that benefited from slavery are still around today, and while the owners & their children, CEO's & their children had nothing to do with slavery, they are still benefiting from slavery working for an institution that was built on the back of slaves. Those institutions have an obligation to help remedy the damages IMO. Supporting black communities and keeping work environments inclusive is enough for me (can't speak for everyone though).

 

[barbos]

Yup, today's whites didn't have anything to do with:

• colonialism
• slavery
• Jim Crow
• red lining
• mortgage covenants
• privatization of public amenities
• reaction to the Civil Rights movement in the 50s/60s.
• high rate of imprisoning blacks over drug offenses 80s/90s

Today's whites are however, involved in a weird conspiracy or communal denial that these things have had no significant impact on the black community in the US, and claim the blacks need to just get over it.

I'd also like to add to the list that many institutions that benefited from slavery are still around today, and while the owners & their children, CEO's & their children had nothing to do with slavery, they are still benefiting from slavery working for an institution that was built on the back of slaves. Those institutions have an obligation to help remedy the damages IMO. Supporting black communities and keeping work environments inclusive is enough for me (can't speak for everyone though).

What about blacks in Africa? They benefited from selling slaves to New World too.

 

[Gospel]

Yup, today's whites didn't have anything to do with:

• colonialism
• slavery
• Jim Crow
• red lining
• mortgage covenants
• privatization of public amenities
• reaction to the Civil Rights movement in the 50s/60s.
• high rate of imprisoning blacks over drug offenses 80s/90s

Today's whites are however, involved in a weird conspiracy or communal denial that these things have had no significant impact on the black community in the US, and claim the blacks need to just get over it.

I'd also like to add to the list that many institutions that benefited from slavery are still around today, and while the owners & their children, CEO's & their children had nothing to do with slavery, they are still benefiting from slavery working for an institution that was built on the back of slaves. Those institutions have an obligation to help remedy the damages IMO. Supporting black communities and keeping work environments inclusive is enough for me (can't speak for everyone though).

What about blacks in Africa? They benefited from selling slaves to New World too.

I don't see any harm in them trying to remedy a wrong either.

 

[barbos]

What about blacks in Africa? They benefited from selling slaves to New World too.

I don't see any harm in them trying to remedy a wrong either.

So reparations from African countries to blacks in US.