Nothing wrong with that, though perhaps unaware, JF engages in social construction of the White race
After beginning the “hang-out” with some faintly vulgar discussion of the process by which he’s fathered a child or two - a discussion apparently occasioned by a hit piece done by a Jewish writer at The Daily Beast, accusing him of nefarious natalist strategy with a “Hispanic woman”..
JF’s interaction and negotiation with the chats and “superchats” demonsrates the social consruction of knowledge - e.g., of the White race, in answer to questions, interlocutive by nature, as to who and “What is White?”
Jean-François Gariépy engages in social construction of the White race, though there is nothing wrong with that and although he might not be fully aware that he’s doing that…
For example:
43:59 (JF)...science, we’re doing science! Colby M: ‘superchat’ question, 2 dollars U.S. - “but are Italians White?” (JF sighs) They are ...Italians, you know, they’re ah, it’s like you can draw the line, you can exclude Italians if you want, but you would exclude me (JF). Because you know what I am? You guys don’t know right? You guys don’t know but I am essentially a Basque. I descend from the Basque. And so, if you cut-out Italians, you cut out the Basques, you cut out a great section of the French population; (shrugs) it’s your choice but it seems to me like its a restrictive definition. Then your White race would essentially be English people. You might even actually kick the Russians out.
45:32 (JF): Look at this. If you kick the Italians, well, ok, you could get the French, the Russian, the Basque in a group, and you still could kick the northern Italians specifically. Personally, I think that you’re better (better off) if you just include all of these in the White race.
Some really funny comments - ‘Eva Braun’: “We must secure the existence of nord-cucks.”
Posted by More for us on Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:52 | #
If JF doesn’t want to look upon Greeks as White, that might be ok:
...more for us.