LifeFuel Total Jeet Death 2025

[DarkStar]

Brutal, currys are the most persecuted group in all of history

Nah that's Slavs

 

[ilieknothing]

Nah that's Slavs

Slavs don’t have threads like this made about them

 

[DarkStar]

Slavs don’t have threads like this made about them

There's been plenty of threads in the past and tons of examples of ethics shitting on Slavs to project onto them since they're the Whites with the lowest historical achievements and have the most Whorish women

 

[ogercel]

 

[anandkoala]

Nah that's Slavs

There's been plenty of threads in the past and tons of examples of ethics shitting on Slavs to project onto them since they're the Whites with the lowest historical achievements and have the most Whorish women

Seriously asking, were initial Polish and Italian immigrants in US discriminated and attacked more than today curries? I think so right?

 

[anandkoala]

View attachment 1358725

Just be Tamil

Sri Lanka doesn't suck.

It does if you are a Sri Lankan Tamil like @Diddy

Tamil genocide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[DarkStar]

Seriously asking, were initial Polish and Italian immigrants in US discriminated and attacked more than today curries? I think so right?

They were still classified as White:

Working Towards Whiteness is full of interesting information about how turn-of-the-century immigrants fit into American racial etiquette, but it suffers badly from the obligatory inability to understand race. Thus, David Roediger, chairman of the history department at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, writes irritatingly about “the making of race,” of the “racialization of immigrants,” or about the “racialized neighborhoods” in which blacks live — as if the ghettos would have been tidy, middle-class suburbs if whites had not “racialized” them. Somehow, generation after generation, Americans “invented” race and forced each other into meaningless categories.

As the title of his book indicates, the equally meaningless problem Prof. Roediger tries to solve is how the 13 million “new immigrants” who came from Eastern and Southern Europe between 1886 and 1935 ended up being “racialized” as white. Later we shall see what prevents Prof. Roediger from seeing the obvious: they were treated as white because they were white.

The prominent sociologist Henry Pratt Fairchild (1880–1956), whom the author calls “racist” for his views of non-whites, took a haughty but different view of the southern or central European: “If he proves himself a man and . . . acquires wealth and cleans himself up — very well, we might receive him in a generation or two. But at present he is far beneath us and the burden of proof rests with him.” Unlettered aliens would have to prove they could become American, and as Prof. Roediger notes, even the Italians found that if they renounced their foreign habits they were accepted. By 1920, scholars were generally predicting that European ethnics would assimilate. They were making no such predictions about blacks.

As even Prof. Roediger himself recognizes, naturalization laws throughout this period specified that citizenship was open to “free white persons,” and no one ever argued that “Guineas” and “Bohunks” were unqualified. Other races were. In 1922, the Supreme Court ruled that Japanese could not naturalize because they were not white. The next year, a subcontinental Indian came before the court, claiming he was “Caucasian,” and therefore eligible. In earlier cases, the court had sought expert testimony from anthropologists as to who was white, but in the Thind case, the justices ruled that it was simple common sense not to consider Indians white. New immigrants from Europe were unfailingly admitted to citizenship.

Does all this mean, as Prof. Roediger suggests, that the old stock did not think the new immigrants were white? The language, religion, appearance, and bathing habits of the newcomers combined to make them alien and even repulsive, but sending a few Sicilians to black schools hardly meant people in the South thought they were actually Negroes. Protestants of British stock did not want to mix with short, dark Catholics, and it was convenient to park them in black schools, and the abortive 1922 anti-miscegenation prosecution is at best a historical curiosity.

@WorthlessSlavicShit
@Regenerator
@Castaway

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

They were still classified as White:





@WorthlessSlavicShit
@Regenerator
@Castaway

Yup, exactly the article I talked about a few times on this. A couple of random Sicilian kids sent to black schools absolutely doesn't mean that Italians, Spanish etc. weren't seen as white in the US.

The next year, a subcontinental Indian came before the court, claiming he was “Caucasian,” and therefore eligible.

The OG "Meds are brown but considered white, therefore I'm also white saar" posting curry.

One Pole wrote home saying, “If such a man were brought to your village then all people would run away from fear.” A Slovak woman going through Ellis Island screamed when a black porter took her bag. She thought he was a monkey. In Clevelands Little Italy, a woman who saw a black in the street for the first time ran home in a fright, shouting “Madonna Mia mi scanza” (“My Lady protect me”). There was a standard immigration story among Italians of meeting their first black and thinking the color could surely be washed off.

 

[Regenerator]

They were still classified as White:





@WorthlessSlavicShit
@Regenerator
@Castaway

The American definition of White is dumb.
Turks, Jews, Arabs & Berbers are considered White too over there.

 

[fukurou]

before AI pajeets poisoned all search results for coding walkthrough.

when the video starts with the words "hello friends" it's an indian scammer.