Seeing the racial tensions in the US today...

Depends on who the future historians will be. If we're talking about Dr. DeShanquelle Jackson from the University of Muh Dick, then probably not very favorably.

"The 20th-21st centuries were dark ages where everyone were at each other's throats. Brother against brother, there reigned an atmosphere of mistrust, constant sarcasm and deep, unspoken, hatred.

The decadent and corrupt oligarchy in power shunned knowledge, burned books, and played sick games on the unaware population, like making their citizens obese, turning them into women, or kidnapping and raping the young children.

Through a live feed of constant pornography that everyone was forced to watch they did the apology of crime, drugs, beastiality, incest, sodomy, adultery, and worse even.

Back in those days the few dissidents who dared disagree were branded as "racists" and then thrown into jail without trial, where they were to be raped and murdered while the population cheered."

>the few dissidents who dared disagree were branded as "racists" and then thrown into jail without trial
I'm guessing this takes place in a future where most of the sources were destroyed except for a stormfront archive

Honestly I'm pretty convinced at this point that progressivism is on its way out.

I think the odds are pretty good that more research will come out establishing the biological basis for demographic differences and the negative impact of multiculturalism, discrediting much of the assumptions that underpin liberal doctrine. Probably also see a return to a more nuanced view of the importance of spirituality and traditional institutions in society.

Lmao good luck

Even if substantial differences are ever to be found that cat is not coming out of the bag.

If there is anything that will make progressivevism go poof it's massive demographic collapse in European nations in another two decades or so not studies showing Africans have less denivosan admixture or whatever.

>stormfront is bad but leftypol tier shilling is fine
fuck off SJW

>more research will come out establishing the biological basis for demographic differences

Genetic engineering is going to make all that irrelevant in our lifetimes.

I was thinking more in the vein of Putnum's research, it's already rapidly becoming self evident that multiculturalism is detrimental to social capital. Just ain't human nature, at some point the left's social engineering will implode in on itself or spark some sort of crisis/backlash.

Almost certainly not before progressives push their luck too far.

>stormfront is bad but leftypol tier shilling is fine

Well you're half right you fucking retard.

>progressives push their luck too far.

What does that even mean?

>Just ain't human nature
What? It's not like multiculturalism is new in any way. Ancient Rome was more multi cultural than modern nation states.

everyone who isn't a """""Race Realist"""""" will hang from the nearest lamp post with everyone else who doesn't share my particular skin tone.

>the SJW is OK with leftypol shilling here

exactly what is /leftypol/ shilling?

raiding

No comparison exist between the hierarchal Roman Empire and then modern left.

*the Modern west

Not sucking miles of Nazi dick. In their mind, either you worship Adolf Hitler or you're a libcuck SJW. Can't be any other kind of conservative, just one that believes in the extermination of "lesser" races.

Multiculturalism isn't a new invention. Countries always were multi-cultural.

>you must accept mass illegal non white immigration and the vilification of white people like a little leftist bitch or their is something wrong with you
leftist logic

...

Exactly what I'm talking about.

That's not what I meant though. Today's multiculturalism is treated as in direct opposition to the traditional people of said nation. It's not an a common civilizational region held together by an iron fisted empire.

I meant more like a popular shift in the culture after normies get tired of being called nazis for not supporting the new oppression fad, maybe defunding universities that push social justice nonsense even. But I mean I guess it's more fun to get hysterical over imaginary race wars than realize that your ideology is as tired and grating as the westboro baptist church and most people just want you to grow up

>leftypol
>supporting mass migration

Hmmm

Kane will abolish all racial tensions as we unite under the banner of Nod.

Depends on how far into the future you go. Attitudes toward history change from generation to generation. I'd say if the future continues to become diverse and racial violence becomes even more commonplace they might think that they were onto something. However if the society examining history is stable and homogenous they will probably start with the "there's only one race the human race :^)" spiel.

"The so-called "race-debates" in the twenty-first century have ventured into historiographical debate themselves. Sociologists and cultural anthropologists were undoubtedly the first academic disciplines which aimed, in their own words, 'to construct a narrative which understands the oppression of people of colour in modern America'. Early research initially proved fruitful, but the heavy reliance on postmodern technique, especially power-relationship paradigms, resulted in the introduction of uncountable variables. How, postmodern scholars began to ask, could we think to separate discussions of race from discussions on sexuality and gender? The seminal work from the period, DayShanqua Freem*n's 'Black Lives Matter, Bitchez: Race, Gender and Sexuality in Baltimore, 2008-2024' (New York: Buzzfeed Publishing House, 2031) is still nearly always the text given to undergraduates interested in taking on race in the twenty-first century. Freem*n, much like much of the postmodernists in the academy, tended to eschew writings and interpretations from white people in general, with xir's latest publication 'Say My Name (If You Can't Use the Correct Pronouns): A Social History of Beyoncé' (New York: Buzzfeed Publishing House, 2058) having a bibliography filled with only 'people of colour' and those who self-identify is LGBTQAIPOSEQ+**&.

OUR LIVES FOR KANE
>tfw c&c4 ruined the story forever

Nevertheless, 'Race, Gender and Sexuality', as well as postmodernism in general, had profound historiographical effects. The most obvious was the emergence of the neo-Rankean discipline. The neo-Rankeans were born almost exclusively from the historical 'race-debates', forgoing what they argued was the overcomplexity of postmodern historiography. Rejecting potentially 'unreliable' source materials, notably oral histories, the neo-Rankeans created a wide body of historical material examining the role of race on governmental policy and action. Ulysses S. Anderson's, the neo-Rankean pionner, 'Truth Shall Make You Free: the CIA, Congress and Race, 2010-2032' (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2039) is perhaps the archetype; demonstrably, it was less a study on race, but more a discussion on how government used intelligence services to ease racial tensions (interestingly, his timeframe begins from the middle of President Barack Obama's first term and ends with President Chelsea Clinton's troubled first term). But one of the cruicual turning points is actually how race is downplayed; where Freem*n might have dedicated a chapter or more to explaining the immorality of twenty-first century racists (not to mention, the dozen pages of content warnings at the beginning) is conspicuously absent in neo-Rankean publications. Instead, historians are beginning not to pass moral judgement on historical characters, but instead ask how the historical characters acted within their own contexts. Criticism is, of course, rife. Arguments range from the postmodern-typical (citing instiutionalised racism and calling for universities to employ their now government-mandated Safe Space Employment Termination charter) to the more academic (is the adoption of pure political history actually an acceptance that postmodernists have adequately explained social relations in the early twenty-first century, rather than a rejection of it?). Clearly, much research is to be done."

Postmodernism is/will lead to the exact opposite of "muh organs are the same, coexist." People are realizing if no objective right or wrong, or no one way of looking at things is correct, no reason exist for self-flagellating tendency like "white privilege," which are only held together by concepts of morality.

Not necessarily. Look at all of the primary sources available on Google books. No one reads those, but they provide a slew of viewpoints that conflict with the standard narrative about various periods in the 20th century.

Thw truth is that the popular opinion of a time period doesn't depend on the actual sources but on what people are told in elementary school. And elementary school teachers just buy any propaganda they are fed in university. Any regime that seizes the university can control the narrative, particularly something sympathetic to storefront that's capable of supporting itself with actual primary sources.

Very good point.

Yeah, unless their society has at least as much racial tension in it as ours does.

They literally worship soros and bernie sanders

>Ancient Rome was more multiculti than most modern states
>and that worked out great,the decadance and subsequent sucessful invasion had nothing to do with the destruction of the veneration of the citizen for the roman traditions
fuck off and die,the Roman Empire could still exist today if it had limited citizenship to those who had served the Roman millitary and those who were born into it