Group Polarization and the Fad of Ethnomasochism

YouTube, September 1, 2012

This video explores group polarization theory as applied to racial liberalism.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • 1911ThePunisher45

    What did I just watch?

    • Ulick

      You just watched an accurate theory as to why some whites hate themselves and their people.

      • Church_of_Jed

        They don’t really hate themselves- they only talk like they do.  If they really hated themselves, they would move into Diverse neighborhoods.

    • I, I dont know.  I just clicked on it because I saw Alexisonfire.

  • Vil

    Well, I no longer like Jim Carrey…

    This video explains very well why liberals behave like stupid, little children.

    • Church_of_Jed

      Shouldn’t Jim Carrey move to a BRA town so that he will be protected from the Whites who always mess things up?

    • The__Bobster

      This did it for me:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me,_Myself_%26_Irene

      Charlie Baileygates (Jim Carrey) is an 18-year veteran Rhode Island State Police trooper who has been taken advantage of by people throughout most of his life. Immediately after his marriage, his wife, Layla (Traylor Howard), cheats on him with a dwarf African-American limousine driver, named Shonté (Tony Cox), who, like Layla, is a member of the high IQ group Mensa. Although Charlie’s friends try informing him of his wife’s infidelity, he still denies the possibility. One year later, Layla abandons Charlie and runs off with Shonté; leaving Charlie to raise three biracial sons who are the products of Layla’s adulterous affair with the limo driver. Charlie never sees his wife again. Charlie raises his illegitimate triplet sons using very vulgar language and spoiling them with sweets and unbalanced diets. Charlie’s three sons become obese and foul-mouthed young adults, but they are also highly intelligent (like their real father) and they treat Charlie much better than anyone else.

  • IstvanIN

    This guy makes a lot of sense.  We are self cannibalizing.

  • Church_of_Jed

    He should post the text.

    My recollection is that he argues that Whites like to be a part of the group, but better than the group.  The best way to be better is to agree with the group, and then go further.

    We love Diversity so much (altruistic social progress), that we hate Whiteness (dangerous and socially violent extremism as exhibited of personal display of piety).

    Thanks to CofCC for the orignal post.  We learn so much that helps make sense of the criminalization of White privilege by daily visits to hate filled, racist websites that the SPLC would outlaw today if it could.

    Save it to your harddrive now.

  • Tom Iron361

    By the time I heard the guy say the word “whereby” I was done.

  • mobocrat

    Group polarization can be seen in most human collectives [racial, religious, political, etc.]. This might be a partial explanation for the phenomenon of the Muslim jihad dynamic expressing itself in suicide attacks. In Whites however, this phenomenon is damaging on an existential level. The suicide attack is directed, of course, at an out group. Group polarization expressed by White ethnomasochism is inward-directed; virtue is expressed as pathological or competitive altruism where the desire to be seen as more worthy than the rest of the group is measured in how much one puts the interests of the “other” ahead of one’s own group. This seems to be a uniquely White pathology. Its etiology may be rooted in the West’s historical variety of religiosity or perhaps the White race’s origin in a hostile climate where altruism toward out-groups served some sort of biological survival imperative. Almost certainly there is a genetic, evolutionary element here. Whatever its precise derivation however, its modern expression is clearly highly maladaptive. Weather biological, cultural, or a combination of both, this kind of group dynamic among Whites is highly vulnerable to exploitation by hostile out-groups or elites, and if we want to survive as a distinct entity-let alone thrive- it must somehow be shed. The importance of this probably cannot be overstated.

  • JohnEngelman

    Among white liberals I have noticed a willingness to suppress criticism of blacks. I have not noticed a willingness to express racial self contempt or guilt. This description of “racial liberalism” is an example of the straw man argument.
        
    ———-
          
    The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of “reasoning” has the following pattern:         
    Person A has position X.
    Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
    Person B attacks position Y.
    Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
                 This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html       ———-       Nevertheless, the phenomena of group polarization can explain why Republicans have moved steadily to the right since 1980. Millions of Republicans get their news from FOX News, and their views from Rush Limbaugh.      FOX News won a lawsuit protecting its right to lie.       http://foxnewsboycott.com/resources/fox-can-lie-lawsuit/                      Responsible news media like The New York Times and The Washington Post print retractions of mistakes as soon as they are aware of them.                            The lies of Rush Limbaugh have been documented since 1994. http://www.google.com/webhp?source=search_app#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=limbaugh+lies+&oq=limbaugh+lies+&gs_l=serp.3..0l2j0i30l2.4387.4387.0.5764.1.1.0.0.0.0.107.107.0j1.1.0.les%3B..0.0…1c.TVfK36PseFQ&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=93e1c7b74945853b&biw=663&bih=522   

    • Ulick

      “I have not noticed a willingness to express racial self contempt or guilt. This description of “racial liberalism” is an example of the straw man argument.”

      So because you personally haven’t noticed white guilt or white contempt among white Liberals, that means that those of us who have noticed it and state as much are putting forth a straw man argument?

      We should take a poll on this and see if others have noticed white guilt and/or white contempt among white Liberals.

      • JohnEngelman

        Not have I not noticed white guilt in my personal life, but I have not noticed it in the liberal commentary I have read. I make a point to investigate various sides of an argument. If you are aware of liberal commentators who argue that whites should be ashamed of themselves, please post the web addresses to that commentary. 

        • Ulick

          But the video isn’t about white liberal commentators. The video is about everday white liberals. So now who is putting forth the strawman argument, John?

          But, if you’re curious about more established white liberals who have expressed white guilt and/or contempt, then here is an example:

          Tom Hayden is an American social and political activist, author, and politician, and director of the Peace and Justice Resource Center. During 1976, Hayden made a primary-election challenge to serving California U.S. Senator John V. Tunney. Starting far behind, Hayden mounted a spirited campaign and finished a surprisingly close second in the Democratic primary. He and Fonda later initiated the Campaign for Economic Democracy (CED), which formed a close alliance with then-Governor Jerry Brown and promoted solar energy, environmental protection, and renters’ rights policies as well as candidates for local office throughout California, some 100 of whom would be elected. Hayden later served in the California State Assembly (1982–1992) and the State Senate (1992–2000).

          A few years ago Hayden’s son married Simone Bent who is of African descent. It has been reported in the May 9th issue of The New Yorker that Tom Hayden honoured his son’s marriage in the following manner:

          As the evening progressed, the parents of both the bride and groom made speeches. Speaking off the cuff, Garity’s father, the political activist and politician Tom Hayden, who was Fonda’s second husband (neither parent want Troy to bear the weight of a famous last name), said that he was especially happy about his son’s union with Bent, who is black, because, among other things, it was “another step in a long-term goal of mine: the peaceful, nonviolent disappearance of the white race.”

          http://ozconservative.blogspot.com/2011/06/tom-haydens-wedding-speech.html

          [Perhaps not the commentary that you’re looking for, but it’s the example of an established white Liberal that I have off the top of my head.]

          • JohnEngelman

            Tom Hayden might claim that he is to the left of liberalism. He certainly would have when he was younger.
                       
            There are guilt stricken white liberals out there. Nevertheless, guilt does not seem to be a central strain of contemporary liberal thinking. 
                                                         
            I consider Thomas Edsall to be a moderate liberal. He has made a career of explaining why the Democratic Party lost the dominance it achieved from roughly the 1930s to the 1960s. His basic argument is that the Democrats became associated with the defense of black interests, and that blacks are associated with social pathology. He is quite critical of blacks. He does not even suggest that whites are responsible for black social pathology. 

    • I’ve noticed both pro-black and anti-white attitudes from white liberals.

      Go to a school and ask people if they would support the existence of a European-American student center.  See what they say.

      Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

      • ncpride

        Very true. Just ask Matt at Towson University. He’s trying to start a White student council, and he is being attacked mostly by his own. On an article I read about it, one poster says that Matt makes him/her (?)  feel embarrassed to be White, and that he/she doesn’t want to be associated with such ‘human garbage’…. Stunning self-hatred I’ll never understand in a thousand years.

    • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

      John Engelman: “Responsible news media like The New York Times…”
      ======================================

      One of the best ways of understanding how “responsible new media” such as the New York Times get the kind of reporting they seek is to study their performance during the Duke lacrosse rape hoax.  Fortunately we have lot of information in that regard.

       Stuart Taylor is a columnist for the National Journal and a contributing editor for Newsweek. He is a fellow at the Brookings Institution. He worked for the New York Times for eight years, covering legal affairs and the Supreme Court. He co-authored, with K. C. Johnson:

      UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Caseby Stuart Taylor, Jr. and K. C. Johnson (BookTV.org video presentation, September 11, 2007)[Click on “Watch” in the upper right corner]http://tinyurl.com/33dflgb
      Excerpt below from the portion of Taylor’s presentation devoted to the New York Times:
      “…The first New York Times reporter on the case, a fellow named Joe Drape, who covered horse races, but who was doing a very good job on this case actually . . . he . . . reported Nifong’s statements the first couple of days.  They dominated his stories — as they should have, that was the news event.  But then he started talking to the defense lawyers.“One of the defense lawyers told me that Joe Drape called him ten times . . . Well, that may be more times than the entire rest of the national media spent calling the defense lawyers combined over the first month of the case . . . but Joe Drape at the New York Times did it and he wrote stories reporting the defense theories and reporting them in an open way . . .“The defense lawyers . . . got together and said this guy is being fair . . . Let’s give him all of our evidence . . . Maybe he’ll turn this around with a big story in the New York Times.  “They give him the evidence, wait for the big story.  Joe Drape calls a few days later and says, I’m sorry that the story about your evidence isn’t going to run.  I’m having problems with editors.  Joe Drape’s byline disappears . . .“A new reporter comes on the case who’s much more willing to give the editors what they apparently wanted, which was the same guilt-presuming, don’t-bother-us-with-the-defense side that the rest of the national media was doing.  And when I say the rest, I mean USA Today, The Washington Post (although it didn’t do much), the Los Angeles Times (although it got better later), all of the major networks . . . the Durham Herald-Sun which was shameful throughout, Nancy Grace, who was mind-bogglingly shameful throughout . . . “The national news media ignored, largely, the evidence.  For example, when the DNA evidence came out that did what the prosecution said would prove innocence on April 10 — I’m not talking about the private DNA, but the state DNA . . . The New York Times reporter Duff Wilson wrote a little story: Well, the defense says it proves this and that and then he called Peter Neufeld of the Innocence Project, who is a great authority on DNA and quoted him in a way that made it sound like he was saying: Well, this doesn’t really prove anything. Not every rape has DNA.“…This struck me as odd so I called Neufeld — through his spokesman at the Innocence Project — and I said, ‘Why did he say that? . . . Didn’t he know the facts of the case, that the woman claimed she was raped for a half an hour by three men, three orifices, no condoms, beating, kicking, strangling — and no DNA?  And you’re saying it [no DNA match] doesn’t prove anything?’“The answer was that Neufeld was told nothing about the facts of the case by the New York Times reporter and so the question basically to Neufeld was: Is it possible that you might some day have a rape that didn’t leave DNA evidence?  Well, sure it’s possible.  But not this rape.  But Neufeld didn’t know that.  And that was not untypical of the way the media covered the story — and for months and months and months they covered it that way.“…Newsweek, which had maybe been too credulous at first, to their credit . . . [had] the first major piece tearing the cover off of this . . . So there were good journalists out there . . . But in the face of all this . . . The New York Times does its definitive revisiting of the story on August 25 of ‘06 — MONTHS after anybody in the media who wanted to look at the evidence realized that it leaned strongly toward no rape.“Well the New York Times’ 5600-word article kind of boiled down to: Well, we looked at the evidence and, you know, defense lawyers, they kind of play games . . . and then there ARE weaknesses in the case but we think it looks like . . . a case you can take to trial. Not a bad case.  It was an astonishingly slanted piece of writing . . . It reported a lot of the evidence of the defense, but it minimized them, it put them in a context that suggests: Well, that doesn’t really amount to anything, and it took some things as probative of guilt that anyone who knew anything about the case would know perfectly well was not probative of guilt.“It’s hard to say enough critical about their coverage . . . After the spectacular expose in open court on December 15 of the prosecution-DNA lab conspiracy to suppress evidence of the multiple male DNA — After that the New York Times finally started saying: Gee, you know, maybe there’s a problem here.  But there was a problem long before that.”====

      • JohnEngelman

        The New York Times may make errors of judgement. It does not deliberately lie the way Rush Limbaugh and FOX News do. 

    • The__Bobster

      Responsible news media like The New York Times and The Washington Post print retractions of mistakes as soon as they are aware of them.   
      ____________

      Decades ago, this liberal rag lied about the Soviet Union and received a Pulitzer prize for doing so. Have they printed a retraction yet?

      • JohnEngelman

        What specifically was the lie? You seem to interpret honest disagreements with you as lies. 
                                                          
        The Soviet government lifted Russia from semi feudalism to the space age while doing most of the fighting and dying to defeat Nazi Germany. 

  • Jay11

    I know so many young whites who are like this.  They try to outdo each other with self-hating and promoting of non-whites and their interests above their own.  Go to any dream act kind of rally and you will see whites there marching for ‘social justice’ and ‘change.’  I could go on with more examples, but you get the point.  Type in ‘anti-white’ on youtube for an eyefull.

  • whiteyyyyy

    great video, he more or less summed it up for me. More and more people are waking up to these rats. It would irritate me if they did’nt  go down with the ship. Treason should come with a price.

  • JustaWhiteMom

    It makes me very happy to see videos coming out like this.  Just think about it.  Right now as we speak, at this very minute, some young white person, maybe hundreds, are waking up.

  • whiteyyyyy

    GRAVITON X  Are your ears burning?

  • splitsing

    Brilliant video.  

  • It makes me sick to see a self loathing white liberal denigrate his own country, people and culture to boast to his cappuccino drinking friends how virtuous he is.

  • One of my favourite pastimes is to observe white liberals interacting with black people . It’s always awkward on the part of the white liberal because he/she doesn’t want to be seen as racist.

    I saw an African immigrant ( just off the boat ) standing at a bus stop the other day, a female white liberal in her mid 20’s ( they’re the worst )  was also at the bus stop and she started up a conversation with the black woman.

    The female white liberal was actually GLOWING, showing off how virtuous she was, speaking to a ethnic, while the female black didn’t realize she was getting patronized,  sat there like a dumpling with a vapid expression on her face.

  • Jim Carrey  is a Canadian, that’s like being a marxist. I liked the bit when he said ” whites always screw up.” Let’s reverse what he said ” blacks always screw up.” Can you imagine the uproar ? but because it’s anti white, nothing is said.

    What a scumbag  Carrey is

    • NYB

      Carrey is a great example of  ‘one upmanship’.   

      As a Canadian stand-up comic who moved south to make it in the American market, he became even more extremist liberal than the California or New York entertainment establishment. 

  •  
    I used to be what I defined as a ‘passive liberal’. I was never involved in any cause but from the history I was taught (news footage of blacks peacefully marching for their civil rights while being attacked by police and dogs) I believed that clearly, blacks had been mistreated and deserved a chance to better themselves through social programs.
     
    The older I got and the more I was around blacks and listened to their endless ‘song and dance’ about long-ago repression, the more angry I got. I became fed up with the excuses why they couldn’t get ahead (always based on theories of racial oppression).
     
    I went to school with blacks and I worked with blacks and I saw the effort (or lack their of) in everything they did. They acted irresponsibly and unprofessionally and then blamed ‘racism’ for their lot in life.
     
    Slavery and Jim Crow may have been legitimate excuses in the past but they are just that, in the past.
     
    I no longer fall for their claims of racial oppression. I SEE their actions and their words no longer hold any sway over me. 

  • Dean_Wormers_Hot_Wife
  • IKantunderstand

    What this means, is that they are winning. The powers that be, have turned our own against us.When a people makes music, MUSIC, that other Whites listen to,  which encourages our death as a people, something is very wrong with our young people. To stand on stage and sing about killing White people? And they do this to “fit in” and be accepted? We are so screwed. Encourage your children, grandchildren, to form rock gruops to sing pro White(European) lyrics.  

  • JohnEngelman

    The Washington Post and The New York Times admit their mistakes. Rush Limbaugh and FOX News repeat their lies. 

  • Dylan Kardashian

    I’ve felt very uncomfortable with this for a long time. I’d like to speak in public about it. On one hand, I feel like we need more leaders for the European movement, on the other, I don’t want to be marginalized.

    • newscomments70

      I think Stormfront is trying to accomplish this. They have always been too radical for my tastes, but they are toning everything down. I believe part of the reason for this is that they are being swamped with supporters from the mainstream. There aren’t many other places to go. According to Alexa, Stormfront is more popular than Amnesty International. The MSM doesn’t advertise this, but you can look it up for yourself. The winds of change are blowing. Droves of whites are quietly migrating to white nationalism. 

  • The Worlds Scapegoat

    Those guys in the video are jewish not white. They don’t consider them selves white any more than they consider them selves Martians.

  • Kurt Plummer

    I would rather have a majority white population like the majority of Mexico is hispanic and the majority of Saudi is Arab and the majority of China is Han Chinese.

    NONE of these nations have a problem with being ethnically unified and ‘militantly conservative’ (our view for our own good, thank you very much to stay out of our lives).

    The notion that we will gain power as we lose force ratios is idiotic.

    The loss ratio in numbers to crime and social displacement over the starting force ratios _always_ determines the final outcome of attrition warfare.  It’s just a matter of time.