Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Agree.Repetitious.
As boring as the first time.
No one dislikes Polish people for being Polish.
------------------------------------------- thing is , who cares IM2. Poles are good people , generally viewed , recognized as WHITE by just about everyone . The ones that don't , well feck'em IM2.Here it is important to understand how, exactly, Americans ‘become white’. The history of Polish-Americans is an illuminating example. Upon arriving in the U.S. en masse in the late 19th and early 20th century, Poles endured discrimination based on their appearance, religion and culture. The largest wave of Polish immigration came in the late 19th and early 20th century. This was for two main reasons: 1. terrible economic conditions in Poland (which at that point was not a country but partitioned between Austria, Germany, and Russia), which led to mass hunger and 2. ethnic persecution, especially in the section ruled by Russia. cIn 1903, the New England Magazine This was a mainstream publication. decried the Poles’ “expressionless Slavic faces” and “stunted figures” as well as their inherent “ignorance” and “propensity to violence”. Working for terrible wages, Polish workers were renamed things like “Thomas Jefferson” by their bigoted Anglo-Saxon bosses who refused to utter Polish names.
The Poles, in other words, were not considered white. Far from it: they were considered a mysterious menace that should be expelled. When Polish-American Leon Czolgosz killed President William McKinley in 1901, all Poles were deemed . potential violent anarchists. “All people are mourning, and it is caused by a maniac who is of our nationality,” a Polish-American newspaper wrote, pressured to apologize for their own people. The collective blame of Poles for terrorism bears great similarity to how Muslims (both in the U.S. and Europe) are collectively blamed today.
But then something changed. In 1919, Irish gangs in blackface attacked Polish neighborhoods in Chicago in an attempt to convince Poles, and other Eastern European groups, that they, too, were “white” and should join them in the fight against blacks. As historian.David R. Roediger recalls, “Poles argued that the riot was a conflict between blacks and whites, with Poles abstaining because they belonged to neither group.” But the Irish gangs considered whiteness, as is often the case in America, as anti-blackness. And as in the early 20th century Chicago experienced an influx not only of white immigrants from Europe, but blacks from the South, white groups who felt threatened by black arrivals decided that it would be politically advantageous if the Poles were considered white as well.
Over time, the strategy of positioning Poles as “white” against a dark-skinned “other” was successful. Poles came to consider themselves white, and more importantly, they came to be considered white by their fellow Americans, as did Italians, Greeks, Jews, Russians, and others from Southern and Eastern Europe, all of whom held an ambivalent racial status in U.S. society. Also, intermarriage between white ethnic groups led some to embrace a broader white identity.
With that new white identity came the ability to practice the discrimination they had once endured.
How do you become “white” in America?
Which is the only nation with a worse military record than Poland?
[Italy.]
Why can't you bury a Polish sailor at sea?
[Because sh!t floats.]
this is a show of proof how the polish practiced the same discrimination against people of color as every other white ethnic group
I'm not getting that from the material you posted.. Maybe YOU should read it again. Because what I GOT from your material was that the Poles WERE victims and tools of the Irish and other Whites who APPARENTLY just tried to convince them that they were not white. But EVENTUALLY -- SOMEHOW --- it all worked out that they were white after all. Or maybe they aren't. But the IMPORTANT point to YOU was --- Poles were NOT black..
Do I have right now? Was there RACIAL discrimination against the Poles? Against the Irish? Are those even "races"???
You cannot call whites discriminating against whites racial discrimination. This is ethnic discrimination. What happened to the Polish, Irish, Italians, etc., was ethnocentrism not racism. They did this among themselves. Blacks did to do this to them. This is where whites get things conflated in their attempt to lecture us on how we didn't have it so hard and how we weren't the only ones that were victims of racism. Whites were not victims of racism. Ethnocentrism is not racism. Not saying it's a good thing, but it is not racism. And at the same time while whites were doing this to each other, every white group practiced discrimination against blacks and other non whites. Notice the last sentence because THAT is my point, not the simplistic conclusion that Poles were not black.
this is a show of proof how the polish practiced the same discrimination against people of color as every other white ethnic group
I'm not getting that from the material you posted.. Maybe YOU should read it again. Because what I GOT from your material was that the Poles WERE victims and tools of the Irish and other Whites who APPARENTLY just tried to convince them that they were not white. But EVENTUALLY -- SOMEHOW --- it all worked out that they were white after all. Or maybe they aren't. But the IMPORTANT point to YOU was --- Poles were NOT black..
Do I have right now? Was there RACIAL discrimination against the Poles? Against the Irish? Are those even "races"???
You cannot call whites discriminating against whites racial discrimination. This is ethnic discrimination. What happened to the Polish, Irish, Italians, etc., was ethnocentrism not racism. They did this among themselves. Blacks did to do this to them. This is where whites get things conflated in their attempt to lecture us on how we didn't have it so hard and how we weren't the only ones that were victims of racism. Whites were not victims of racism. Ethnocentrism is not racism. Not saying it's a good thing, but it is not racism. And at the same time while whites were doing this to each other, every white group practiced discrimination against blacks and other non whites. Notice the last sentence because THAT is my point, not the simplistic conclusion that Poles were not black.
It was YOU and your source that made it about skin color. Go back and read the (supposed) accusations from the Irish. Therefore the analysis sucks. Because Poles are a culture. They might have some uniquely identifying DNA for long-time Poles -- but that has nothing to do with skin color or race.
Your source made a BIG F'ing deal about the drama of whites arguing over their OWN racial purity. Only to end up at --- the "us" vs "them" conclusion that you like to see.
You always want to argue when race is bought up. That is a tell tale symptom that you are not colorblind but I fact you have a severe racial bias.
You always want to argue when race is bought up. That is a tell tale symptom that you are not colorblind but I fact you have a severe racial bias.
And you don't ARGUE when race is the topic??
OK -- I've been called a racist. I guess I'm not buying into that "remote diagnosis".. You don't know racists. You don't know anything about my life or actions. I was "detained" during a race riot outside a Head Start location in Miami when a bunch of cops tried to put young black girls head thru our storefront window. I did a little "push back"...
I'm not buying anymore of this crap... You have no support. You've alienated all the neutral folks. Continue down that road. Please. Just won't be with me...
this is a show of proof how the polish practiced the same discrimination against people of color as every other white ethnic group
I'm not getting that from the material you posted.. Maybe YOU should read it again. Because what I GOT from your material was that the Poles WERE victims and tools of the Irish and other Whites who APPARENTLY just tried to convince them that they were not white. But EVENTUALLY -- SOMEHOW --- it all worked out that they were white after all. Or maybe they aren't. But the IMPORTANT point to YOU was --- Poles were NOT black..
Do I have right now? Was there RACIAL discrimination against the Poles? Against the Irish? Are those even "races"???
You cannot call whites discriminating against whites racial discrimination. This is ethnic discrimination. What happened to the Polish, Irish, Italians, etc., was ethnocentrism not racism. They did this among themselves. Blacks did to do this to them. This is where whites get things conflated in their attempt to lecture us on how we didn't have it so hard and how we weren't the only ones that were victims of racism. Whites were not victims of racism. Ethnocentrism is not racism. Not saying it's a good thing, but it is not racism. And at the same time while whites were doing this to each other, every white group practiced discrimination against blacks and other non whites. Notice the last sentence because THAT is my point, not the simplistic conclusion that Poles were not black.
It was YOU and your source that made it about skin color. Go back and read the (supposed) accusations from the Irish. Therefore the analysis sucks. Because Poles are a culture. They might have some uniquely identifying DNA for long-time Poles -- but that has nothing to do with skin color or race.
Your source made a BIG F'ing deal about the drama of whites arguing over their OWN racial purity. Only to end up at --- the "us" vs "them" conclusion that you like to see.
You .need to pay attention to what the article was about. The article was titled, How do you become “white” in America?. The first 2 sentences say this, Here it is important to understand how, exactly, Americans ‘become white’. The history of Polish-Americans is an illuminating example. After this, the article went into detailing the history of the polish in America. You ignored to first two sentences which set the premise for the rest of the article. The source did not make any drama about anyone arguing over racial purity.The accusations from the Irish is not the point of the article, it was an illustration of what poles went though, but the reality still mains that they dropped all that to practice racism against blacks because they decided much like the Irish did, that it was more important be white, than to be polish.
You always want to argue when race is bought up. That is a tell tale symptom that you are not colorblind but I fact you have a severe racial bias. There are whites who I have held such discussion with who do not deny racism at every turn like you and most of these guys do. And not all of them are liberals. I live in a republican state so I can say that. Now I'm sure you will tell me how you do not deny that racism exists but you have refused to see how the poles practiced racism against blacks and that what they faced was not racism as is being asserted here.
this is a show of proof how the polish practiced the same discrimination against people of color as every other white ethnic group
I'm not getting that from the material you posted.. Maybe YOU should read it again. Because what I GOT from your material was that the Poles WERE victims and tools of the Irish and other Whites who APPARENTLY just tried to convince them that they were not white. But EVENTUALLY -- SOMEHOW --- it all worked out that they were white after all. Or maybe they aren't. But the IMPORTANT point to YOU was --- Poles were NOT black..
Do I have right now? Was there RACIAL discrimination against the Poles? Against the Irish? Are those even "races"???
You cannot call whites discriminating against whites racial discrimination. This is ethnic discrimination. What happened to the Polish, Irish, Italians, etc., was ethnocentrism not racism. They did this among themselves. Blacks did to do this to them. This is where whites get things conflated in their attempt to lecture us on how we didn't have it so hard and how we weren't the only ones that were victims of racism. Whites were not victims of racism. Ethnocentrism is not racism. Not saying it's a good thing, but it is not racism. And at the same time while whites were doing this to each other, every white group practiced discrimination against blacks and other non whites. Notice the last sentence because THAT is my point, not the simplistic conclusion that Poles were not black.
It was YOU and your source that made it about skin color. Go back and read the (supposed) accusations from the Irish. Therefore the analysis sucks. Because Poles are a culture. They might have some uniquely identifying DNA for long-time Poles -- but that has nothing to do with skin color or race.
Your source made a BIG F'ing deal about the drama of whites arguing over their OWN racial purity. Only to end up at --- the "us" vs "them" conclusion that you like to see.
You .need to pay attention to what the article was about. The article was titled, How do you become “white” in America?. The first 2 sentences say this, Here it is important to understand how, exactly, Americans ‘become white’. The history of Polish-Americans is an illuminating example. After this, the article went into detailing the history of the polish in America. You ignored to first two sentences which set the premise for the rest of the article. The source did not make any drama about anyone arguing over racial purity.The accusations from the Irish is not the point of the article, it was an illustration of what poles went though, but the reality still mains that they dropped all that to practice racism against blacks because they decided much like the Irish did, that it was more important be white, than to be polish.
You always want to argue when race is bought up. That is a tell tale symptom that you are not colorblind but I fact you have a severe racial bias. There are whites who I have held such discussion with who do not deny racism at every turn like you and most of these guys do. And not all of them are liberals. I live in a republican state so I can say that. Now I'm sure you will tell me how you do not deny that racism exists but you have refused to see how the poles practiced racism against blacks and that what they faced was not racism as is being asserted here.
So, Poles weren't White when being White had advantages?
Now, that being White holds disadvantages Poles are White?
I think it stinks that a Pole who has the same SAT scores as a Black, would most of the time be denied college.
‘Were We All People?’
‘The Auschwitz Volunteer,’ by Witold Pilecki
By TIMOTHY SNYDERJUNE 22, 2012
One man volunteered for Auschwitz, and now we have his story. In September 1940 the 39-year-old Polish cavalry officer Witold Pilecki deliberately walked into a German roundup in Warsaw, and was sent by train to the new German camp. His astounding choice was made within, and for, Poland’s anti-Nazi underground.
Poland had been destroyed a year earlier by its two powerful neighbors: eastern Poland had been annexed by the Soviet Union; the western half, including Warsaw, was taken by Nazi Germany. The Soviets overwhelmed Polish attempts at resistance in their zone, but under the Germans, officers like Pilecki managed to establish confidential networks that would come to be known as the Underground State and the Home Army. Auschwitz was set up to render Polish opposition to German rule impossible, and the first transport from Warsaw, in August 1940, had included two of Pilecki’s comrades. He went to Auschwitz to discover what had become of them, and what the camp meant for Poland and the world. This he learned and conveyed.
Pilecki’s report on Auschwitz, unpublishable for decades in Communist Poland and now translated into English under the title “The Auschwitz Volunteer,” is a historical document of the greatest importance. Pilecki was able to smuggle out several brief reports from Auschwitz in 1940, 1941 and 1942, and wrote two shorter reports after his escape in 1943. The long report that constitutes this book dates from 1945 and summarizes what he noted along the way: the brutality of Auschwitz as a German concentration camp for Poles in 1940 and 1941, and its transformation into something worse over the course of the war.
In the beginning, Poles in the camp were killed in public, in improvised and quite brutal ways; in time, deliberate exposure to the elements, concealed shootings and phenol injections became the rule. By the end of the war, Poles would be the third-largest victim group at Auschwitz, after Hungarian Jews and Polish Jews. But during Pilecki’s first year they were most of the prisoners and most of the victims.
‘The Auschwitz Volunteer,’ by Witold Pilecki