"ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACIST" - Watch Jane Elliott

Before you watch this 20 minute clip I suggest you open your mind and remember, this isn't about apportioning blame, it's about learning and looking at everything you thought you knew.
After watching this, I realised I have been inherently right on this forum when I told you all that everyone is a little bit racist and that it is more racist to NOT SEE COLOUR.

We all see colour. As you will find out.
She just explains it better than I did.

Oh. And when you get to the world map, your mind may well be blown.
Watch it all.

When you say that everyone is a bit racist, you mean white people of course. That's racist because you're not counting non-white people. I would say that a lot of black people are racist towards white people.

Not all white males have blue eyes, so this woman lost the argument straight away.

Did you watch it? What are your thoughts on what she said generally?


(The blue eye/brown eye experiment isn't shown on this clip but I will put it up later.)

This is a really good video I'm hoping for some feedback

The map is something I am familiar with and was equally amazed when I first read about it a few years ago (a history of the world in 12 maps, great read if you enjoy history!).

The problem is that the Peters projection does distort land masses a lot. Its the enduring difficulty of having the map a spherical world onto a flat sheet. The Mercator projection (the famous one) only distorts the north, which gives that hightened importance the 'white' nations.

It is effective though.

I don't think place America centrally is racist though. In the east the eastern nations are central. In Africa, Africa and Europe are central. In all the Americas, America is central. It makes sense to have your own country at the centre of your own maps. But yes, that does lead to feeling of importance, and due to its geography it does break things even more to have America as central and Asia being on both left and right.

Africa being tiny on a map is ridiculous though, and maps should be altered to fix that because it is the second biggest land mass after Asia.

That was her point Les.

What did you think to the rest of what she had to say?

I think the thread title is wrong - it's only Jane Elliot who claims that all white people are racist. It's not fair to state it as a fact.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the thread title is wrong - it's only Jane Elliot who claims that all white people are racist. It's not fair to state it as a fact.

Okay I will put in speech marks to make it clearer, but you're not arguing against her point. Do you think she might be right?

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the thread title is wrong - it's only Jane Elliot who claims that all white people are racist. It's not fair to state it as a fact.

Okay I will put in speech marks to make it clearer, but you're not arguing against her point. Do you think she might be right?

I haven't actually watched it yet. I think I've seen something like it before though.

If people are racist, they're racist. You can't make someone like another person, and unless they break the law, does it matter? If a black person didn't like me because I'm white, that's their loss.

I haven't watched it yet, but I don't believe that all people are racists...I disagreed with Eddie when she said it once too.
I'm not struck on believing sweeping generalisations....we are not all robots to be programmed to think certain ways imo.

I'm not sure why it's not obvious that some people truly don't see or judge a person on their colour, accent, race or anything else that pigeon holes people.
Maybe...just maybe some people judge a person on who they are inside.

I will watch the video later.

eddie wrote:Did you watch it?  What are your thoughts on what she said generally?


(The blue eye/brown eye experiment isn't shown on this clip but I will put it up later.)

My thoughts are she's making a mountain out of a molehill and stating the bloody obvious. It may well be coming from a noble place, and some of what she says rings true, but not all of it. This is her job, so she'll be wanting to perpetuate her talks and seminars and writings etc. I agree with the idea of us being proud of our differences and embracing them rather than trying to pretend we are all the same...we're not. But differences don't equate with superiority, and that goes for all races, colours, sexes, ages, beliefs, mindsets, education, class, upbringing, etc. The simple adage, 'Do as you would be done by' is all that's needed. Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:Did you watch it?  What are your thoughts on what she said generally?


(The blue eye/brown eye experiment isn't shown on this clip but I will put it up later.)

My thoughts are she's making a mountain out of a molehill and stating the bloody obvious.   It may well be coming from a noble place, and some of what she says rings true, but not all of it.    This is her job, so she'll be wanting to perpetuate her talks and seminars and writings etc.   I agree with the idea of us being proud of our differences and embracing them rather than trying to pretend we are all the same...we're not.   But differences don't equate with superiority, and that goes for all races, colours, sexes, ages, beliefs, mindsets, education, class, upbringing, etc.   The simple adage, 'Do as you would be done by' is all that's needed.   Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.  

Nope, in reality, "do others before they do you".

Major wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

My thoughts are she's making a mountain out of a molehill and stating the bloody obvious.   It may well be coming from a noble place, and some of what she says rings true, but not all of it.    This is her job, so she'll be wanting to perpetuate her talks and seminars and writings etc.   I agree with the idea of us being proud of our differences and embracing them rather than trying to pretend we are all the same...we're not.   But differences don't equate with superiority, and that goes for all races, colours, sexes, ages, beliefs, mindsets, education, class, upbringing, etc.   The simple adage, 'Do as you would be done by' is all that's needed.   Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.  

Nope, in reality, "do others before they do you".

How old are you? I mean, in all your years, haven't you gleaned any wisdom or sagacity? You really are either on a wind up, or genuinely a bigoted old miserable cuss.

Not being disrespectful but I really want to talk to the people who watched it so I can talk about the things she actually spoke about.
I don't want to discuss what people think she means.

Back later

I watched 7 minutes of the video, that was enough.
Not knowing what happened before she spoke it's hard to make an accurate  assumption, but it is she who is the main person there who is discriminating... firstly against everyone who does not have brown eyes....her quaint way of saying black people.
She also seems to be a man hater.....in fact she comes across as a potty old woman, egged on by the audience, the majority being black people, so she was onto a winner really.

Syl wrote:I watched 7 minutes of the video, that was enough.
Not knowing what happened before she spoke it's hard to make an accurate  assumption, but it is she who is the main person there who is discriminating... firstly against everyone who does not have brown eyes....her quaint way of saying  black people.
She also seems to be a man hater.....in fact she comes across as a potty old woman, egged on by the audience, the majority being black people, so she was onto a winner really.

That's why you need to watch it all. Then you'll find her blue eyed people comment actually means something else. But... I do feel that people like her actually perpetuate racism rather than heal it. I'm more inspired by the likes of Martin Luther King.

Yes, you needed to watch it all as it's the last half that's the most relevant.

Eilzel wrote:The map is something I am familiar with and was equally amazed when I first read about it a few years ago (a history of the world in 12 maps, great read if you enjoy history!).

The problem is that the Peters projection does distort land masses a lot. Its the enduring difficulty of having the map a spherical world onto a flat sheet. The Mercator projection (the famous one) only distorts the north, which gives that hightened importance the 'white' nations.

It is effective though.

I don't think place America centrally is racist though. In the east the eastern nations are central. In Africa, Africa and Europe are central. In all the Americas, America is central. It makes sense to have your own country at the centre of your own maps. But yes, that does lead to feeling of importance, and due to its geography it does break things even more to have America as central and Asia being on both left and right.

Africa being tiny on a map is ridiculous though, and maps should be altered to fix that because it is the second biggest land mass after Asia.

Hieghtened Importance to European Nations
the Australian contients is undersized (Africa is the most undersized) in Mercator projection Maps.

No matter how hard we try Europe wont accept the more accurate Hobo-Dyer Equal Area Projection Map
http://www.transpacificproject.com/index.php/paradigm-shift/




You can see how far off it is in the below
the coloured being the Realistic Peters projection and the black lines the Eurocentric Mercator projection(as you said not fixed way to transfer sphere to flat)

And i gotta laugh

So Eddie a 20+ year old TV segment?

You wonder why I say the Uk is Decades behind!!!!

Is there NO Fucking Hope for Humanity? almost a quater of a Century old, From a nation That has NOT been that successful in it's race relations AND you want to taker that Advice?
                                               

What?
You're drunk tonight Veya.

feckin aussies...even their maps are upside down

eddie wrote:What?
You're drunk tonight Veya.

Jane Elliot on the Oprah show in the mid 90's
Not really relevant in 2016 Unless you are decades behind

Literally You have proven what i said to be correct YOU are decades behind, that's the problem.

HE'S NOT DRUNK EDDIE, HE'S JUST A TOTAL RACICIST, BORING SELF OPININATED TWAT WHO THINKS THE SUN SHINES OUT OF HIS ARSE. HIS HATE FOR THE ENGLISH IS BOILING HIS BRAIN.

nicko wrote:HE'S NOT DRUNK EDDIE,    HE'S JUST A TOTAL RACICIST,   BORING SELF OPININATED TWAT WHO THINKS THE SUN SHINES OUT OF HIS ARSE.    HIS HATE FOR THE ENGLISH IS BOILING HIS BRAIN.    

it's not hate for english is hate For idiots.

Of course a moron like yourself cant tell the difference,  cause if anyone suggests ENGLAND IS HOW IT ACTUALLY IS (NOT PERFECT) YOU START WHINGING LIKE A LITTLE GIRL WITH HER DOLLY STOLEN !!!

And is anything I have said About the Englsih Untrue?
Nope.
You lot even go out of you way to PROVE me correct.
Eddie posting 20+ year old videos and Comparing the Uk to a 3rd world nations,
You being a cry baby constantly, Never post a fact or contuer point, Just insist that no one says truthful things about England cause your too pathetic to hear it, Which again is the NOT ACCEPTING REALITY as i have accused the UK of too.



The only one that had any knowledge in thread is Les          

And HT that i gave green to

So what if the video is twenty years old?
Then don't watch it or discuss it!

Perhaps you're simply upset because she dares to say that everyone - INCLUDING YOU - is racist.

Youve added nothing to the thread as usual, except you've popped your cork, yet again, over your exasperation of the English. It makes you over-excitable.

IT IS ALL YOU EVER TALK ABOUT.

Hate to say this, but I'm starting to not read your posts lately - for the first time ever. You're really becoming a weird shouty person and boring most of us to death.

Now you're derailing the thread. If you have nothing to say on the actual fucking topic then fuck off somewhere else.

eddie wrote:Not being disrespectful but I really want to talk to the people who watched it so I can talk about the things she actually spoke about.
I don't want to discuss what people think she means.

No one is actually discussing whether she's wrong or right.

Interesting.

I can't bring myself to watch the whole thing at the moment, so I have no comment.

THE HEADING for both the video and this thread is simply false...

WHAT Jane Elliot's thesis should be, is "Everybody is prejudiced/bigotted to some extent.."

I'VE seen her interviews before, and later experiments and trials based on her "blue eyes--brown eyes" principles.

SUCH behaviour by people isn't only obvious on racial and ethnic grounds, but also on differences in other emotive issues such as religion, politics, sexuality, freedoms, tastes in food or music..

Jane Elliot comes across as a member of the 'black armband brigade', overly influenced by the heavily racist neighbourhoods she grew up in and worked in up to 1994..
IT IS a long stretch to claim that "all" whites are racist, while ignoring negroes, Asians and 'coloured' folks --as if the whole world was one homogeneous mess..

WE have all seen "racist" behaviour from most ethnic groups somewhere or other.
Indeed the most racist countries around the Asia-Pacific region are Japan, and even India shows some disgusting group behaviour at some international cricket matches..      

HOW MANY Canadians, New Zealanders, Aussies or Scandinavians did she interview during her research  ???      

Thank you wolf, an actual post that addresses the OP.

I think she's a bit OTT but her reasoning behind it all is that we are taught to be racist (she speaks mainly of Amercian culture tbf hence the world map "lie").   She claims that white Americans are taught from a young age through an educational programme to only see White's as superior.

She rubbishes the claim that white people "don't see colour" and rather than that being a comfort to a black or Asian person, is actually a way of saying "I don't see your colour so I make you the same as me": But black people are not the same as white people, not on the inside and not on the outside and rather than pretending these differences dont exist, we should celebrate and accept them as different.

I was really hoping someone would address this issue with me as I have been saying for ages and ages (and so do all the black and Asians I know) that to NOT be racist IS TO SEE THE COLOUR.

I have said over and over, of course you must see the colour, to not do so is denying who someone is.

Not one person ever understood that on this forum, yet she was saying it years ago.

Whitiz and non whitiz do not mix well or ever have done, why does anyone think they ever will?

Just look at the USA and the black problem there, what does that tell us????

The race relations act was 'forced' upon whitiz, does anyone believe it has measurably helped?
Whitiz versus non whitiz will go on and on and on and on and on like Ariston, never change as history shows, it is far from a one sided issue.

Now it appears that non whitis are having an advantage in instances.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THE HEADING for both the video and this thread is simply false...

WHAT Jane Elliot's thesis should be, is "Everybody is prejudiced/bigotted to some extent.."

I'VE seen her interviews before, and later experiments and trials based on her "blue eyes--brown eyes" principles.

SUCH behaviour by people isn't only obvious on racial and ethnic grounds, but also on differences in other emotive issues such as religion, politics, sexuality, freedoms, tastes in food or music..

Jane Elliot comes across as a member of the 'black armband brigade', overly influenced by the heavily racist neighbourhoods she grew up in and worked in up to 1994..
IT IS a long stretch to claim that "all" whites are racist, while ignoring negroes, Asians and 'coloured' folks --as if the whole world was one homogeneous mess..

WE have all seen "racist" behaviour from most ethnic groups somewhere or other.
Indeed the most racist countries around the Asia-Pacific region are Japan, and even India shows some disgusting group behaviour at some international cricket matches..      

HOW MANY Canadians, New Zealanders, Aussies or Scandinavians did she interview during her research  ???      

Thank you Wolf
I find it hard to comprehend that peoples can still be so backward as to not understand the over simplification in the video.
I mean this has been dealt with in many societies over the past 2 decades, so why it is even in question is a statement in itself.

Everyone uses 'stereotypes' (what she is talking about)
the brains of most animals including humans do.
it is the way it is built.

AND that is different than racism.
Racism(or sexism etc) is the Institutional disadvantage some groups face.
In Western Nations generally there is a lot of institutional advantage to being a straight white male.

Why the USA is a terrible example is it's racial issue is combined with socioeconomic issues that are the result of it's relatively recent end to slavery. (150 years is not so long ago as to not have an effect on the present)
In nations where most minority races are migrants, like the UK or Australia or New Zealand or Singapore (that's right and they are not white)
the issue is different, it is about treating people as individuals. Particularly in the eyes of the law.
And being accepting of variance within the law. the simple principal of 'is it actually hurting anyone else'.
And some grumpy old bugger that is scared of change doesn't count.

Major wrote:Whitiz and non whitiz do not mix well or ever have done, why does anyone think they ever will?

Just look at the USA and the black problem there, what does that tell us????

The race relations act was 'forced' upon whitiz, does anyone believe it has measurably helped?
Whitiz versus non whitiz will go on and on and on and on and on like Ariston, never change as history shows, it is far from a one sided issue.

Now it appears that non whitis are having an advantage in instances.

And Major Highlights WHY the UK needs to look at other nations that DO live happily and successful together rather than looking at the USA with it's terrible record of slavery
And needs to get in the modern world and throw away the false opinions of past eras, we can and are doing better an will continue to improve as long as we don't allow society to succumb to the narrative of fear ones like major promote

An issue that has to be addressed is the fact that making it equal is not giving them an advantage, it is just taking away yours.
But surely you should have it in you to earn what you got fairly Not rely on unfair advantage like a cheat

People who say they don't see colour aren't being racist, and obviously they don't mean it literally. They simply mean that they see a black person as ... well a person really, like them. That's not racist.

That woman said at the start that colour is merely a chemical in the skin, and then later on she said colour is very important. Illogical.

Has she done an experiment to see how racist black people are about white people? I bet she hasn't, and yet that racism does exist - I've seen it on another forum - big time.

THE VERY FACT that anybody can actually believe that "non whitiz" are being giving some "advantage" not enjoyed by the rest of us, just shows how deranged and fanciful some peoples imaginations really are !!!

veya_victaous wrote:

eddie wrote:What?
You're drunk tonight Veya.

Jane Elliot on the Oprah show in the mid 90's
Not really relevant in 2016 Unless you are decades behind

Literally You have proven what i said to be correct YOU are decades behind, that's the problem.

My god and people are saying Why do we talk about 150 years ago!!!!
it's pretty bloody apparent you are not taking into account the past...

At last and least, some interesting counter points.

I thought she was over-zealous and a little unfair to label every white American, a racist.
I do though, believe that there is (or was) in certain places, a certain amount of racism being taught in schools albeit, unconsciously perhaps.

Major wrote:Whitiz and non whitiz do not mix well or ever have done, why does anyone think they ever will?

Just look at the USA and the black problem there, what does that tell us????

The race relations act was 'forced' upon whitiz, does anyone believe it has measurably helped?
Whitiz versus non whitiz will go on and on and on and on and on like Ariston, never change as history shows, it is far from a one sided issue.

Now it appears that non whitis are having an advantage in instances.

Storm sorry mate but you're the reason we have people like Veya, blowing his mental gasket over the UK's supposed "stupidity".

If you choose not to like, or mix, with non-White's, then that's your perogative.
Your statement about them not being able to live together harmoniously, is absolute rubbish and makes me want to blow a mental gasket!

Major wrote:Whitiz and non whitiz do not mix well or ever have done, why does anyone think they ever will?

Just look at the USA and the black problem there, what does that tell us????

The race relations act was 'forced' upon whitiz, does anyone believe it has measurably helped?
Whitiz versus non whitiz will go on and on and on and on and on like Ariston, never change as history shows, it is far from a one sided issue.

Now it appears that non whitis are having an advantage in instances.

Read the link and repost something with a little compassion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_of_Jesse_Washington

This will counter balance the OP vid

Yep. A great counter. Said it all really.

eddie wrote:

Major wrote:Whitiz and non whitiz do not mix well or ever have done, why does anyone think they ever will?

Just look at the USA and the black problem there, what does that tell us????

The race relations act was 'forced' upon whitiz, does anyone believe it has measurably helped?
Whitiz versus non whitiz will go on and on and on and on and on like Ariston, never change as history shows, it is far from a one sided issue.

Now it appears that non whitis are having an advantage in instances.

Storm sorry mate but you're the reason we have people like Veya, blowing his mental gasket over the UK's supposed "stupidity".

If you choose not to like, or mix, with non-White's, then that's your perogative.
Your statement about them not being able to live together harmoniously, is absolute rubbish and makes me want to blow a mental gasket!

Blaming the Major for Veya losing his mind is not very fair. The Major is giving his opinion, and from that video I'd say he has a good point. People want to be seen as equals but then they want to be treated differently because of the colour of their skin. How is anyone supposed to get on with each other? They don't have a clue what the "rules" are any more. If you ignore someone's colour you're being "racist", and if you draw attention to it, you're being "racist" too.

It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

eddie wrote:It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

He said whites and non-whites, which could include Asians, etc.

Of course they can mix, but the more people bang on about imaginary "racism", the more concerned people will be about saying the "wrong thing", and they might not bother to mix with anyone who they see as "different" to them.

eddie wrote:It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

It's that mindset I can't stand. The 'I don't want a black arse sitting on my bog seat' mentality. Yes, I actually knew someone who said that. It's that mindset that instigated lynchings.

Black and white can mix. Anyone can mix. The problem lies not with skin colour but cultural differences. That's a different issue and I'm sick of seeing it lumped in with skin colour and labelled racist. It's not 'racist' for a Hindu to want to marry a Hindu. Nobody kicks up a stink when a Muslim won't allow intermarriage with a Christian. We ARE different and there's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our own cultures and individuality. But...I can't stand this 'we iz whitez and u go back to umbongo land' shit.

eddie wrote:

eddie wrote:Not being disrespectful but I really want to talk to the people who watched it so I can talk about the things she actually spoke about.
I don't want to discuss what people think she means.

No one is actually discussing whether she's wrong or right.

Interesting.

I think she's wrong for most of it. Creating problems that should go away but constantly picking it all apart and analysing it.

I have two "mixed race" great grandchildren and another on the way, plus 14 other white Great GRANDCHILDREN, AND I LOVE 'EM ALL!

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

It's that mindset I can't stand.  The 'I don't want a black arse sitting on my bog seat' mentality.   Yes, I actually knew someone who said that.  It's that mindset that instigated lynchings.  

Black and white can mix.   Anyone can mix.  The problem lies not with skin colour but cultural differences.   That's a different issue and I'm sick of seeing it lumped in with skin colour and labelled racist.   It's not 'racist' for a Hindu to want to marry a Hindu.  Nobody kicks up a stink when a Muslim won't allow intermarriage with a Christian.  We ARE different and there's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our own cultures and individuality.   But...I can't stand this 'we iz whitez and u go back to umbongo land' shit.

I can respect that. As I was saying to someone the other day, just because people are different from one another doesn't mean we can't get along.

You can take that to an extreme and see what I mean ...

A small English village decides (theoretically) to expel all non-whites. "Finally, harmony!" the remaining villagers say.

Then two men get into a drunken fist fight, and it turns out they supported different soccer teams. So the village has a referendum and expels everyone who supported the instigator's favorite team.

Then a woman is raped and when they find the perpetrator, someone points out his surname is Welsh. Bye-bye, Welsh people.

And on and on, until literally one family is left living in the village.

eddie wrote:It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

But they will not completely mix ever eddie, look at the good old USA for example, look at the KKK, look here at the muzzzzzzzzzi problem, look at the whole world and the muzzzzzzzzi problem.
Look at those luvlee pakistani people and the indian nation, they do not exactly like each other.
Look at the American Indians, the Canadian Indians wiped out by the white man,

Whitiz and blacks do not, will not go well together.

Major wrote:

eddie wrote:It's his "blacks and whites can't mix" rubbish that I have a problem with.

But they will not completely mix ever eddie, look at the good old USA for example, look at the KKK, look here at the muzzzzzzzzzi problem, look at the whole world and the muzzzzzzzzi problem.
Look at those luvlee pakistani people and the indian nation, they do not exactly like each other.
Look at the American Indians, the Canadian Indians wiped out by the white man,

Whitiz and blacks do not, will not go well together.

What would you recommend?

Ben Reilly wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

It's that mindset I can't stand.  The 'I don't want a black arse sitting on my bog seat' mentality.   Yes, I actually knew someone who said that.  It's that mindset that instigated lynchings.  

Black and white can mix.   Anyone can mix.  The problem lies not with skin colour but cultural differences.   That's a different issue and I'm sick of seeing it lumped in with skin colour and labelled racist.   It's not 'racist' for a Hindu to want to marry a Hindu.  Nobody kicks up a stink when a Muslim won't allow intermarriage with a Christian.  We ARE different and there's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our own cultures and individuality.   But...I can't stand this 'we iz whitez and u go back to umbongo land' shit.

I can respect that. As I was saying to someone the other day, just because people are different from one another doesn't mean we can't get along.

You can take that to an extreme and see what I mean ...

A small English village decides (theoretically) to expel all non-whites. "Finally, harmony!" the remaining villagers say.

Then two men get into a drunken fist fight, and it turns out they supported different soccer teams. So the village has a referendum and expels everyone who supported the instigator's favorite team.

Then a woman is raped and when they find the perpetrator, someone points out his surname is Welsh. Bye-bye, Welsh people.

And on and on, until literally one family is left living in the village.

Yes. It's called being 'Tribal'. It's what we humans are. But....we are also, or should be, intelligent enough to rise above the hate. I have no problem at all with any race, colour or creed. The only problem I have is when someone attempts to force their cultural or religious differences on me or disrespects mine.