Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Boxing' started by Ambrose, Dec 17, 2017.
The finest group of elites of any race. Don't quibble about purity -please.
I voted Loma because he's finally become The Star he is destined to be in front of America's eyes!
I nominate Jeff Horn for upset of the year.
GGG most steady but still underrated. I was of opinion he beat Canelo.
’Tis not my intention to kick off a quarrel or anything but I am compelled to say something.
To quibble is to argue about - or attempt to find fault with - matters of little consequence. A quibbler splits hairs about trivialities. Correct?
Now, I assume that the “purity” you asked people not to “quibble” about was that of Gennady Golovkin, who is half-Korean and Billy Joe Saunders, who is an English Romanichal gypsy. In order to keep things short, we’ll concentrate on the far more obvious - and far less complicated - case of perennial Caste Football favourite Golovkin.
Are Koreans White? No. So how can the half-Korean Golovkin possibly feature as a choice in a poll which asks respondents to vote for “white fighter of the year 2017”? Can you detect a slight deficiency in credibility? I can.
The respective definitions of “racial awareness”, “miscegenation”, “halfbreed”, “Eurasian”, and - most importantly - “White” are all rather clear cut. So are the definitions of terms such as “credibility”, “hypocrisy”, and “fact”.
A person is either White, or they are not. Golovkin is not White. He is a Eurasian halfbreed. If you classify Golovkin as a White, you might as well classify mulattos as Whites. The latter clause of the previous sentence sure sounds ridiculous, does it not…
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with admiring Golovkin as a boxer. But there is something fundamentally wrong with trying to convince oneself and others that Golovkin is White. That’s when one begins to look like a fellow who is desperately attempting to “claim” successful non-White boxers as “our own”.
I also don't want to kick off a war of words as I respect everyone here and I appreciate the time they take to contribute. But, I agree with you. I don't view Golovkin as white. It is perhaps a bit convenient to our cause that he is, for the most part, considered white. However, he still isn't. I think it's great that we cheer for him, but I don't believe he should be considered on the list for white boxer of the year. I also am not sure Alvarez should be on that list, but that's another topic.
Those are good and valid points. My take on it is this: if blacks take Ward as black we can take GGG as white -especially because it seems almost all in boxing see him as white as dislike him for his place of origin and biology of origin.
GGG is 1/4 Korean.
Aussie translplant Kotsya Tzsyu is a quarter Korean too and I don't think anybody on this site considers him White, but during this fight I will take him....
Vasyl Lomachenko is the best fighter this year of ANY race.
Yes, you are correct. I apologise for my mistake. After seeing a photo of Golovkin’s mother, I assumed she was Korean or some Korean-central Asian hybrid. A quick online search has just verified your information. But in the greater scheme of things, it doesn’t really matter because Golovkin still isn’t White.
Just out of interest, I wonder if Golovkin’s pro-White fans would perceive him differently had his father been Asian and his mother been White…
Yes, but we aren’t Negroes, are we…
Unlike Whites, blacks have never chosen - nor have they historically ever been in a collective position to choose - to place any emphasis on “racial purity”. Besides, “pure” (sic) African Negroes haven’t achieved sh!t (apart from being able to take one…), so they have never possessed a cultural or civilisational legacy that required “genetic protection”.
Whites viewed any form of miscegenation as acutely shameful and utterly abhorrent. With very rare exceptions, the perpetrators and products of such “unions” were subject to immediate social and familial ostracism - which is exactly how it should be. Even the merest hint of the “tar brush” somewhere in the distant branches of a person’s family tree could result in a fatal taint on their reputation and thereby reduce his or her social standing. One was either White, or one wasn’t. Again, that’s exactly how it should be. Nothing discourages “inappropriate" behaviour (be it interracial marriage or “dating”, open homosexuality, et cetera) quite like permanent social blacklisting. Golovkin's father, of course, is a "race traitor"...
The manner in which Negroes perceive “membership” of their race, on the other hand, has always been a direct inversion of the strictly exclusive White paradigm. Negroes have an expansively inclusive definition of “blackness”. In White societies, the smallest drop of non-White blood has always excluded a person from the White race whereas among Negroes, the smallest drop of Negro blood automatically makes a person “black”.
Despite their slobbering bluster, Negroes are keenly aware of their ignominious inferiority as a race and are pathologically obsessed with “proving” their “worth” (sic). Consequently, they display a tendency to instantly and enthusiastically “claim” almost anyone as a “black”. I recall an occasion on which Negro John Fashanu was a colour commentator for the 1994 FA Cup final. Following a particularly impressive piece of play by Ryan Giggs, Fashanu proudly gushed that “Ryan Giggz iz African. ‘Iz favah iz black. ‘Iz favah iz African”. The universal Negro inferiority complex and resultant need to psychologically co-opt the successes of anyone with even the most distant black ancestry is never too far from the surface. As things go, Giggs’ father was a mulatto - but to the tar-skinned, wide-nosed, thick-lipped (and equally thick-headed) Nigerian-West Indian Negro Fashanu, he was unmistakably black, as was the quarter-black and 100% white-looking Giggs himself.
After all, despite the undisguised Negro hatred of Whites, any European admixture in a black has always been consciously or subconsciously viewed as a sign of prestige. To Whites, miscegenation equated with proven genetic debasement of the top of the range, gold standard human. To Negroes, the halfbreed was - and remains - a genetic improvement (of sorts…).
I’m sure you’ve noticed that whenever Negroes brag about the “beauty of black women” they invariably cite mulattos, quadroons, and other part-White females as “evidence”. Pitiful, isn’t it…
We have our own culture, our own achievements, and our own boxers. We don’t need to “claim” Eurasians or anyone else as “Whites” or “White enoughs”.
white is right -
As I said, there’s nothing wrong with admiring a non-White boxer…