Privileged Suburban Brats

They often go off the edge and become outright bullies. The type you’d see on the first Karate Kid movie (1984). The ones teasing “little Danny (mocking crying face)”, throwing his bike off a cliff (with him in it) – lol – going to Cobra Ki Karate School.

Anyway, my encounters with them, though maybe somewhat deserved – were incredibly horrible – ranging from my time as a teacher to being called faaaagot (goat sound) at college.  Always it’s the same type – these bratty boys (and also girls) who get everything they want – and are so bored, all they have to do with their time is pick on the weak. They will pick on anyone – even teachers, old people – and, of course, peers – and even as older adults, they will pick on kids!

What’s the solution for this? A trip to the woodshed – of course! But whose going to give it? The parents of these brats are often the same – and other ones are incredibly naive.

Alt Left: Insane SJW Definition Creep and the Cultural Left’s Grotesque Abuse of Language

Both Pharos and Eidolon have become the main portals for digital public scholarship on the Internet for White supremacists, misogynists, anti-Semites, ethnonationalists, and xenophobes. These sites are using words taken from the Greco-Roman world.

It’s an association that Bond and other scholars say they simply cannot abide, not least because far-right extremists have committed nearly three times as many acts of fatal terrorism in the United States over the previous 15 years as Islamist terrorists.

White supremacists, misogynists, anti-Semites, ethnonationalists, and xenophobes. Let’s look at the modern definition of those terms.

White supremacists: Someone who says “It’s ok to be White”, “I like my race, my White race”, “At the moment, Whites are more intelligent than Blacks”, “Whites commit 6X less crime than Blacks”, “The reason for a lot of anti-Black racism is the outsized amount of crime that Blacks cause.”

Those are all arguably true and a couple are simply justifiable opinions. Sentences 3, 4, and 5, although being true, are not particularly very nice things to say, so most decent people don’t talk about that.

I don’t like to talk about those things too much because I don’t think there is much we can do about any of them and they’re not likely to change. All talking about that stuff does is rile up non-Blacks and bring out a lot of hidden racism in them.

Also the non-Blacks who harp on those truths over and over are not motivated by scientific inquiry. Almost all of them are motivated by deep animus towards Black people. That’s why they keep harping on negative stuff about Blacks! Facts aren’t hate, but haters and racists can definitely abuse facts as part of their racist BS. But since when did observing facts become racist!?

Misogynists: “Women aren’t perfect.” Any criticism of women in any way, shape, or form means that you hate women. Supporting men’s rights. Disliking women who hate men which is what most feminists are. Using words like bitch and whore.

Anti-Semites: “Jews have a lot of power”, “Jews have a lot of money,” Jews have a lot of money and power and like to throw their weight around”, Jews like to play hardball and fight dirty”, “Jews are a lot more aggressive than most other ethnicities”, “A lot of Jews don’t like Gentiles”, “Israel is a shitty little country”, “I hate Israel”,

“A fair percentage of Jews have a dual loyalty issue, and this has always been a problem”. “Jews lead movements, particularly movements for social change”, “Israel is a racist country”, “Israel controls the entire US government when it comes to US Middle East foreign policy. It does this via massive campaign donations by US Jews to Congressional candidates”.

“Jews have a lot of power and control in Hollywood”, “Jews have a lot of power and control in the media.” And on and on.

Ethnonationalists: People who wish for the US to retain a White majority, as is their complete right. Furthermore, it is a legitimate political position, and it is not necessarily racist at all. While I don’t necessarily support this position, as I don’t care that the US is becoming increasingly non-White or even regard it as as good thing, it’s certainly not racist per se to have that view.

Your nation is like your home. You decide what the interior of your nation or home looks like, and you decide who gets to come into your nation or home to visit or stay.

Granted most folks with this position are openly and extremely racist, but you don’t have to be a racist to have this view. Just saying.

Oh by the way, Jews get to have an ethnonationalist state, and you’re an anti-Semite for objecting, but Whites can’t have a similar state that ensures a White majority? Israelis and White nationalists both want the same thing. They are both ethnic nationalists who wish to live in ethnonationalist states that guarantee a majority for a certain ethnicity.

By the way, I am not keen on ethnonationalism. It’s pretty horrible everywhere it rears its grotesque head, it seems to be invariably intertwined with some pretty serious racism, and there doesn’t seem to be any way to disentangle the hardcore racism from the ethnonationalism. The racism is a feature, not a bug.

Xenophobes: Anyone who wants any sort of immigration controls at our border at all, thinks illegal immigrants should be deported, believes in a points scheme for legal immigration, or thinks legal immigration is too high and wants to lower it.

Now I am not real wild about xenophobia, and true xenophobes tend to act pretty horrible towards anyone who’s not one of “the people”, but I don’t believe that merely wanting some immigration restrictions and opposing de facto Open Borders makes one a xenophobe.

I support all of the immigration restrictions listed above and I’m not xenophobe. Considering that I interact with non-Whites all day long every single day where I live, my life would be pretty unpleasant if I hadn’t made some sort of peace with non-White people.

I’m also okay with  legal immigrants. If you have a green card, good for you. If you are a naturalized citizen born overseas, good for you. I have known many good people in both categories recently.

What we see the SJW’s doing here is what I call the abuse of language. The Cultural Left has become expert at this and the correlating definition creep. For instance the definition of rape used to be fairly clear (“use of force of the threat of force” as my Mom used to sternly remind me).

Now the definition of rape expands by the day to the point where now it’s about as big as the Atlantic Ocean. You almost need to get updates on a daily basis to see how much the definition of rape expanded yesterday.

Rape is a serious matter. The feminized weaponization of the term as a nuclear weapon to shoot at the men they hate so much along with their concomitant trivialization of the term is grotesque in the former and profoundly unfair to the victims of the real deal rape in the latter, such real thing rape being unfortunately not rare.

The modern feminist definition of rape appears to be “any time a woman has sex when she doesn’t want to.”

This was precisely the definition of rape given by one of the doyens of modern feminism, Katharine McKinnon, the ultra-prude and manhater extreme who invented the concept of sexual harassment with her aider and abettor Andrea Dworkin, a hideous monstrous slug of a woman and one of the worst manhating feminist dykes that ever slithered upon the Earth and befouled its surface with her slime.

Alt Left: Why Conservatives Push the “Welfare Hurts the Poor” Argument

RL:

Welfare is simply not a problem. If you cut these underclass Blacks off welfare, they will act just as bad if not worse. In the Caribbean and Africa, they don’t get one nickel of welfare and they act even worse than they do here. If anything the welfare probably makes them act better.

Jason Y:

I wonder why conservatives – just can’t see that. It seems like they just keep throwing this “spoiled poor people (seems like paradox) thing”.

They probably can see it. They simply do not like their tax dollars being used to pay to help poor people. That’s the basic beef. That makes them sound like lousy and immoral people though, and while conservatism is indeed lousy and amoral, conservatives are human, and don’t like to appear like jerks even if they are acting like them, appearances being everything and all that. So if conservatives can push an argument that forcing them to pay to help poor people, which they hate for selfish reasons, is actually bad for people anyway, then they can rope in a lot of “humanitarian” morons and people with guilty consciences who feel bad about being selfish jerks.

“You’re forcing us productive people to pay to help these poor people get out of poverty, but the money you take from us just makes them worse and even more poor! That’s crazy! You’re stealing our money and making the problem worse!”

Get it?

The “Spoiled Poor People” Theory

This sickening line of thought has infected many conservatives in the US – and even some centrist liberals.  It’s basically claiming that welfare has “spoiled” people, taking away the initiative for them to “grow up” – also leading to the massive decay of society – especially one-parent homes.

However, how much is actually true?  Well, as @Robert Lindsay noted – among poor Blacks, at least, there’s no evidence welfare has spoiled them – considering poor Blacks behave horribly in the Third World – where they get no welfare.   Anyway, with regards to Whites and others, it could be something similar.  What I mean, is that something else is at play – not the supposed “spoiling from welfare”.

Anyway, of course, this doesn’t phase conservatives – and I think their thinking comes from a negative human trait – where some people want to feel superior to others – not to mention, all the hypocrisy going on also.

Jews Owning Everything

https://beyondhighbrow.com/2019/05/12/korean-american-crowdfunding-kye/

Well, Jews are smart – perhaps a master race – as @Robert Lindsay noted.  However, though, the fact they own things – may not be due to IQ.  I mean, family loaning, as I discussed in the above article – doesn’t need a high IQ.  Basically, family members donate to a needy member  – and then the member agrees to pay back with interest to the donators – all to make up for traditional bank loan rejection, something common with immigrants.

Anyway, though, it does seem like the groups doing family loaning have a high IQ anyway, including Jews, of course.  Those groups would be Chinese, high-caste Indians, Koreans etc..

What about Somalis owning stores in the US?

Alt Left: How Chinese See Underclass Blacks

There is little crime or bad behavior in orderly, polite Chinese society of the sort that is commonplace in the Black underclass.

In particular, the habit of many Black men of fathering multiple children all with different women and then refusing to support any of them would outage and offend any decent Chinese man to the core. That’s the ultimate non-Confucian behavior. A proper Chinese man would say that those Black men who do that are barely even human. Instead, they are akin to stray dogs that roam our streets.

Because, the Chinese man would say, that’s what an animal, especially a dog, does. A male stray dog pretty much runs around screwing any available hotted up bitch while of course refusing to support or even acknowledge the offspring.

The Chinese man would say that this is one of the things that distinguishes man from the lower animals. Male humans pair bond with one female human and the male and female human together raise any children they have for nigh unto 20 years, sacrificing much along the way.

Alt Left: Blacks: An Anatomy of a Half-Civilized People

When we talk about the amorality, uncivilized, antisocial or criminal behavior of various groups of people, we need to differentiate between white collar crime or controlled crime and the uncontrolled, chaotic nature of street crime.

After all, when I am walking down a dark street late at night in a bad neighborhood and I see a man in a suit and tie following me, I don’t suddenly think with terror, “Oh no! That guys about to commit a health and safetly violation!” Even if he’s a white collar crook, he will probably leave me alone, at least tonight on this street for sure.

But if I see a young, typical dead-eyed underclass or ghetto Black following me at the same time and place, I will be most alarmed. While it’s not true that he is sure to be dangerous, the likelihood of him being dangerous to me is much more than 0%.

While both Asians and Jews have reputations for being white collar crooks, neither race engages in much of the savagery and barbarity of street crime. On the other hand, sadly, many Blacks still do act this way.

Blacks are a half-civilized people. When I say that I do not mean insultingly that most if not all Blacks are only halfway civilized. Anyone with eyes and ears can figure out that that’s not so. Instead they are half-civilized in that maybe half of them are quite civilized in the Western sense (the American Black middle class), while the other half is still quite savage and barbarous (the underclass), though even they have calmed down and gotten a lot more civilized in the last 150 years.

We succeeded at civilizing maybe half of them, the middle class half, while the other half are still pretty savage and barbarous, especially when they are young and male. However, Blacks, even the worst Black men, tend to mellow out and become more civilized as they get older.

Even the half of the Blacks that are uncivilized are still much more civilized and less barbarous and savage than they were 150 years ago before the civilizing effort. I think US Blacks are more civilized than Caribbean Blacks, and African Blacks are still quite barbarous and savage. Nevertheless, even African Blacks have become much less barbarous and savage than they were 150 years. This is probably due to colonialism, though I hate to credit such an amoral institution.

Alt Left: Anatomy of a Chinese Stereotype: Lack of Creativity and Inventiveness

Lack of Creativity and Inventiveness

 

Chinese are very inventive. They are much more inventive than we thought they were. This idea that they lack creativity and only copy others but never invent is nonsense.

Of course they copy and even shameless steal from the inventions of others in order to gain that expertise and manufacture that product. But left on their own, I do not think the Chinese are any less creative than Jews, and Jews are probably one of the most creative and inventive races on Earth.

Here the Chinese seem to differ from the Jews, as the Jews are creative in many ways, particularly literature, poetry, fiction, and nonfiction. The Jewish brain is very heavily weighted towards verbal skills, while it is relatively weak in math and science (other than one-offs like Einstein). The Jewish verbal IQ is said to be an unbelievable 125. Any race with a verbal IQ that high will out-compete any other race they are competing with, and of course, the Jews do just that.

The Chinese brain on the other hand, is wired towards science and math while being comparatively weak in verbal skills. Note the lack of major novelists coming out of China. Okay, we have Mao Yan. Off the tip of your tongue, anything else?

Alt Left: Anatomy of Two Chinese Stereotypes: Greediness and Lack of Aesthetic Taste

Thinking Mouse:

What do you make of the stereotype that Chinese are greedy amoral worker drones with no aesthetic taste and little emotion?

Lot of truth to those things. Let’s take these one by one here. We previously discussed amorality and stoicism or lack of emotion, so let us look at greediness and lack of aesthetic taste. I will also look at Jews as many Chinese stereotypes are Jewish stereotypes as well.

 

Greediness

 

The Chinese are white collar criminals, and they are amoral in that sense. Very similar to the Jews. It may be the case that any group with IQ’s markedly higher than the majority will not only grab most of the money under capitalism but will also be profoundly ruthless and amoral in how they go about it, often to the point of basically being a race of white collar criminals, which is what I would call Chinese and Jews.

Both Chinese and Jews are viewed as being fanatically money-oriented, materialistic, and aggressively driven to succeed at all costs. As the Jews have their Jewish mothers and uncles with pinky rings, so the Chinese have the newly created Tiger Moms

Lack of Aesthetic Taste

 

You can make the lack of aesthetic taste argument about all those other Chinese-influenced societies. The Chinese or Japanese artist is deliberately spare and seems at first glance to be drawing excessively, shall we say, modest paintings. It is as if the Asian artist feels ashamed of artistic talent and is deliberately dumbing down in his art so as to not appear better than others.

Nevertheless, artists have told me that Chinese and Japanese art is excellent in its own spare, somewhat minimalist, and certainly modest sense.

Both Chinese and Japanese have taken to modern literature, the Japanese in particular in terms of fiction. But both races have early traces of fiction in the form of epic tales that are basically novels extending back centuries, even to 1000. Think of The Tale of the Genji or Water Margin for Japanese and Chinese respectively.

Japanese invented a very interesting, spare, minimal, “shy”, and modest or self-effacing form of poetry called the haiku, which in its own way reaches to the peaks of literature.

The Japanese also took up Western or rock music. Many excellent rock bands of all sorts have come out of Japan. The Chinese, like the Italians, have been entertaining themselves via operas forever.

Alt Left: Anatomy of Two Chinese Stereotypes: Amorality and Emotionlessness or Stoicism

Thinking Mouse:

What do you make of the stereotype that Chinese are greedy amoral worker drones with no aesthetic taste and little emotion?

Lot of truth to those things. Let’s take these one by one here. Let us look at emotionlessness and  amorality and for starters. I will also look at Jews as they are accused of some of these very same thing, not to mention that Jews and Chinese have a lot in common.

 

Emotionlessness or Very Understated Emotions

 

The Chinese practice inscrutability. This is one of the hallmarks of not only their but also all other Chinese-influenced societies in Asia such as Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Thailand.

Say a wild, boisterous, screaming, hollering violent fight breaks out on a train. An older Japanese men, maybe 40, gets between the fighters and calms. He never loses his cool or gets very emotional in the process.

These Chinese-type cultures would say that that man is displaying the ultimate in masculinity. He’s the most macho guy on the train, simply because these people regard keeping cool under pressure and not caving in easily to emotions as extremely masculine behavior. And in the Nietzschian sense, the man on the train is indeed the biggest man there, the Ubermensch. He rose above everyone on the train, did he not?

However, the inscrutability, like so many Chinese habits, is largely fake, for show, or like a game. The Chinese are trained to appear inscrutable, not to be emotionless. Of course they have emotions. But they regard a wildly emotional person as akin to a beast of the jungle. After all, most beasts seem to have few emotions being fear or rage, and they are usually showing one or the other or both.

Beneath the inscrutable mask, the Chinese would say you can have any emotion you wish. But you are supposed to hide it from others, once again a form of extreme modesty and politeness taken nearly to the point of obsequiousness.

All of these China-influenced cultures are rather shy, deliberately self-effacing nearly to the point of being self-hating. This is mostly just a show or a game, but in all Chinese societies, modesty is highly valued, and braggarts, loudmouths, showoffs, blowhards and just noisy people in general are regarded as at best uncivilized and at worst barely human.

After all, many animals care nothing about raising a ruckus. Animals lack modesty by their very nature. This extreme, almost bizarre modestly of the Chinese probably comes from Confucian values, which were then overlain with Communism, which also regards showoffs, braggarts, and egotists as lousy Communists at best and downright society-destroying hooligans at worst.

Amorality

 

However, behind that stone-faced mask, the Chinese man may be hatching all sorts of devious schemes because once again like the Jews, the Chinese tend to be underhanded, sneaky, scheming, and conspiratorial nearly to the point of appearing diabolically devious. Check out Sun Tzu if you don’t believe me.

That’s how a Chinaman fights. Rules? What rules? Once again this akin to Jews who have always been accused of fighting dirty, playing hardball, and violating all rules in conflict. The intelligence branch of the Jews themselves after all has the motto of “By way of deception, though shalt do war.” The author of The Art of War himself would have been proud to have written that line.

Neither the Chinese nor the Jews for that matter  engage in savagery and barbarism (though the birth of Israel has created this very thing).

The Chinese are the Jews of Asia with the exception that they are not professional revolutionaries in every way, that they are not out to smash all taboos, and they do not want to change the societies in which they live.

Even in the Philippines and Indonesia, where 2% of population, the Chinese, controls 75% of the wealth, they just let the native Malays do whatever the Hell they want to as far as how to run society. The Chinese just want their money. They keep out of politics and the society-changing efforts that cause so much anti-Semitism when Jews engage in them, as is their nature.

This world-changing, ever-revolutionizing nature of the Jews is one of the main drivers of anti-Semitism, especially among conservative nationalists who see Jews as undermining and destroying the moral and traditional fabric of their lands. The Jews are always rebelling. Now, I am rather sympathetic to this trend, mind you. I’m a bit of a revolutionist myself and always have been.

Both Jews and Chinese also tended to lead Communist revolutions at the same time that their ethnic group was hoarding 32-80% of the wealth. So both the Chinese and the Jews are ultra-capitalists of the worst sort while also being some of the ultimate and often most radical Communists.

Alt Left: Against the Jewish Mystification of Anti-Semitism

Against the Jewish Mystification of Anti-Semitism

After being thrown out countries 106 times, instead of concluding that they might possibly, just maybe, even theoretically be doing be doing something wrong even a tiny bit wrong like any normal group, the Jews instead have activated ego defenses on a tribal level of projection, denial, and mostly repression, the latter of which they excel in.

The Jewish line about antisemitism is that it always happens for no reason or for some stupid or even insane reason (the Jewish conspiracy line). There is simply no rhyme, reason, or logic to anti-Semitism according to the Jews.

This race has even funded entire research institutes to try to figure out why so many people hate them, which is alarming right there.

There is a Center for the Study of Antisemitism in Israel in which a bunch of Jewish eggheads expend much cognitive energy trying to figure out why so many people hate their guts. The fact that this race felt the need to create such an academic research tank in the first place is alarming and out to take you aback.

Of course its material is almost completely useless as every document issued by this stink tank concludes with numbing repetition that the antisemites hate Jews for absolutely no reason at all when they do not hate them for idiotic or delusional reasons.

Yes, the Jews are often hated, sadly or even heartrendingly tragically, but they are indeed hated for a reason. And it’s not a dumb reason or a crazy reason. It’s in fact the exact reason you would suspect given Jewish competition with non-Jews.

Alt Left: A Puzzle Solved: The Main Reason for Antisemitism Uncovered

Antisemitism is caused by Jews. Antisemitism follows Jews like day follows night. A lot of antisemitism simply boils down to the fact that the Jews are intellectually superior to the White Gentiles they have always lived among.

Hence you get situations like Jews, 2% of the population, owning 32% of the wealth of Germany. No nation is going to put up with that, no matter if the money-hoarders got it fair and square or stole every nickel of it. And indeed not coincidentally, Adolf Hitler assumed power as the dictator of Germany that very next year after gaining the most votes in the prior election. Not that I am excusing the monstrosities and horrors of the Nazis. I’m no Nazi. More like the opposite. But the Nazis did not engage in their horrors for no reason at all. Most terrible things are done for reasons, usually not very good ones but reasons nonetheless.

But the sad fact is that anti-Semitism is simply the “normal”, though regretfully so, reaction of of non-Jews towards Semitism, or Jewish behavior in the societies in which they live.

I will credit the much-maligned Kevin MacDonald with that particular insight. In the sense that he finally figured it out, right there, this particular antisemite, MacDonald (he wasn’t one at first but he’s surely one now), is smarter than every Jew who ever lived combined because he finally solved the theorem that the Jews have been pondering for 1,500 years.

Please note that when I say normal I don’t mean good. Many terrible things are sadly normal, death and taxes being two that immediately come to mind. I mean normal in the sense of common as wifebeating is common and therefore “normal” while still being reprehensible.

And as I noted, much anti-Semitism simply derives from the outrage, offense, envy, and sour grapes attitude of whatever Gentiles the Jews happen to be competing with at the time. The Jews are simply a superior race, perhaps the most superior race on Earth, hence they tend to out-compete most if not all other races, obviously provoking outrage and sore-loserdum among the defeated.

The Jews’ crime is being too successful! In fact, they are so successful that the races they beat get so mad about the Jews always winning the gold that they go to the envious retaliatory extreme of murdering Jews simply because they won the race and showed up the defeated losers. Jews then are so successful that they actually get murdered for their success by the envious and outraged races that they defeated!

An Epiphany: Everything Happens for a Reason

Humans have this strange idea that things happen for no reason. One thing that I finally hit on last year at age 60 was the remarkable (to me anyway) conclusion that everything and I mean most everything happens for a reason.

Things often happen for bad reasons, but still there’s a method behind the madness.

Speaking of which, things more times than we want  to admit also happen for crazy reasons. Crazy people, after all, tend to have reasons for most of their crazy behaviors. They usually have crazy reasons for these behaviors but they have reasons nonetheless.

Once I had this epiphany, so many things about the world fell right into place, locking perfectly as an oddly shaped fragment into an equally bizarrely shaped hole in this crossword puzzle we call life.

Alt Left: Book Review: “The Negro in Jamaica: : Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London”

Book Review: The Negro in Jamaica: Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London, by Bedford Pim. 1868. London: Trubner & Company.

Great for the first half, the second half is rather boring. It concerns a report to a British anthropological society about the uprisings of the Blacks in Jamaica in the 1800’s when it was a British colony. The portrayal of Blacks here is not complementary at all, and it would be called racist in modern terms.

However, this portrayal is not racist at all. I believe it was simply observational with keen eye of objectivity. The Black man in the Caribbean and in Africa for that matter was a forlorn specimen, barbarous and savage in the worst possible way.

I will briefly add that the book is racist in the way it patronizingly defends colonialism and says the Blacks of Jamaica were not mistreated when obviously they were. The report also says that Blacks cannot govern themselves, which is dubious.  They can govern themselves. Not very well, but they can do it. They do it in the Caribbean, in Africa and even in large US cities. The only solution to this problem then was that Blacks should be put under permanent supervision of Whites until they had gradually become civilized.

By the way, this was also the colonially stated beneficent rationale for apartheid. For all I know, they may have been honest about it. South African Whites felt that Blacks had to be held under apartheid bondage until such time as they had achieved civilization enough to live on equal terms with Whites.

Be that as it may, apartheid was still immoral and had to be done away. Why? Because it was simply the right thing to do and for no other reason. The fact that South Africa has gone seriously downhill under Black rule is irrelevant. Humans have a right to self-rule, and whether they do so well or not so well is strictly up to them.

The solution advocated in this book is to continue to bring Blacks from Africa and work them on five year contracts for White plantation owners, after which they would be returned to Africa. One cannot help but notice that the endless insistence here that the Black man cannot rule himself just so happens to provide a rationale for Britain to retain the colonial possession of Jamaica. Wink win.

Although of course you can see shadows of this barbarous behavior in modern day Africa, the Caribbean and the US Black underclass, what is shocking is the growth of the Black middle class since the Civil Rights era and how they do not resemble the degraded race portrayed here in any way, shape, or form. A large percentage of the Blacks have become, in a word, civilized. The problem was not so much genetic or biological as cultural.

Via exposure to White society over 150+ years, a large percentage of Blacks, the Black middle class, have become civilized people. They bear no resemblance to the barbarous brutes in this book at all. One would be shocked if they were told that they were of the same race. Indeed the difference is so profound that the only sane conclusion is that we are talking about two different races, which is of course not true.

The message here is that integration is the way to go. The deficiencies of Blacks are not so much biological as cultural. All Blacks needed was the guiding hand of the civilizing impulse, as is the case with so many other human groups.

The other message is that White people are good for Blacks. I should amend this to say that good White people are good for Blacks. Obviously, White slavers or enforcers of Jim Crow in the US and elsewhere in the Americas was not good for Blacks, athough this book tries to make the case that it is.

It’s good for Blacks to mix with good, decent Whites or even to marry with said Whites. Left on their own to congregate in large cities, they act like crabs in a barrel, pulling down anyone who tries to escape and driving each other down to the lowest common denominator in a race for the bottom behaviorally. Large groups of Black people don’t seem to work. Blacks act best as a rather small minority, 20% or less, in a larger group of Whites, Hispanics, or Asians.

The Blacks don’t have any numbers, so they don’t influence each other much. Further, the same Blacks who would obviously degrade quickly in the hood do much better when integrated, as they try to mimic the behavior of the races around them, races which tend to set the bar higher behaviorally.

Integration works. The way to ameliorate the Black problem in the US or any other land is to thoroughly mix them in small numbers with Whites, Hispanics or Asians. This brings out the best in the Blacks. It’s good for us, for them, and for society. Everyone wins.

Integration today, integration tomorrow, integration forever!

Down with Franchises!

No kidding.  Well, myself, I know why people like franchises – and why people shell out – usually $50,000 to a million to get one.   It’s simply cause customers are suckers for franchises.  They trust franchises.

However…  the landscape is dotted with these maggot franchises – ranging from McDonalds to Wal-Mart.  I mean, isn’t it nice to eat at a restaurant like – Main Street Pizza every once in a while – or shop at a store called Center Street Hardware?

Anyway, some people have made a success without a franchise, though.   They make it a success cause they simply have really good stuff and they try to throw in a personal touch to what they’re doing, try to connect to the customer.

Normal guy culture – is NOT Stormfront culture

Well, I mean, there was some sweathogs back in high school (in Southern Appalachia) etc..  We joked around  – but it was nothing like you’d see among white supremacists – or this sub-group, found in public schools etc. – of really trashy/psycho white people.

Anyway, the SJW left wants to make a culture that’s so sensitive – that guys cannot even breathe!  Even though, back in the day, most normal guys were ALWAYS disgusted with hardcore racists/misogynists/bigots.   They came across as psycho – assholes, pussies  trying to get even for being losers, uptight.

But now white identity politics is trying to make it SEEM LIKE white supremacist thinking – IS normal guy thinking!

Fuck the South – I didn’t write this article – lol

https://www.thestranger.com/seattle/fuck-the-south/Content?oid=19816

Well, actually I would want to FUCK the SOUTH; it has HOT WOMEN – no joke!

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment? Who do you think those wig-wearing, lacy-shirt-sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

(above) Yeah, quite a bit of irony there!

Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate, you marriage-hyping dickwads? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: Nine of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? Ten out of 10 are fucking red-ass, we’re-so-fucking-moral states.

Hypocritical Christians are the reason.

The next dickwad who says, “It’s your money, not the government’s money” is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the 10 states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least… can you guess? That’s right, motherfucker, they’re red states. And 8 of the 10 states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy. They’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: Buy your own fucking stop signs, asshole.

I don’t necessarily agree with what he’s saying here.  Well, a lot of democrat-voting blacks are in the south (In fact, the BLACK BELT); he left that out!  Well, sure there a lot of white welfare bums too, though – as in the north.

Classicism against white trash justified?

Well, looking at my article, yes:

A Barbaric Culture – is the South USA

Considering how they act/talk – these days – it’s totally justified.

But the snobbish – but often very justifiable hatred against poor whites is nothing new.  It amazes from the following article what snobs and racists – the great leaders and thinkers in the US and elsewhere were regarding the topic (a lot of the fallout from the eugenics movement):

In his classic study, Democracy in America (1835), French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville sees the state of poor white southerners as being one of the effects of the slave system. He describes them as ignorant, idle, prideful, self-indulgent, and weak, and writes about southern whites in general:

From birth, the southern American is invested with a kind of domestic dictatorship … and the first habit he learns is that of effortless domination … [which turns] the southern American into a haughty, hasty, irascible, violent man, passionate in his desires and irritated by obstacles. But he is easily discouraged if he fails to succeed at his first attempt.[16]

Another theory held that the degraded condition of poor white southerners was the result of their living in such close proximity to blacks and Native Americans. Samuel Stanhope Smith, a minister and educator who was the seventh president of Princeton College, wrote in 1810 that poor white southerners lived in “a state of absolute savagism,” which caused them to resemble Indians in the color of their skin and their clothing, a belief that was endemic in the 18th and early 19th century. Smith saw them as a stumbling block in the evolution of mainstream American whites,[17] a view that had previously been expressed by Michel-Guillaume-Jean de Crèvecoeur in his 1782 book, Letters from an American Farmer. Crèvecoeur, a French soldier-diplomat who resettled in the United States and changed his name to J. Hector St. John, considered poor white southerners to be “not … a very pleasing spectacle” and inferior to the prototypical American he celebrated in his book, but still hopes that the effects of progress would improve the condition of these mongrelized, untamed, half-savage drunken people who exhibit “the most hideous parts of our society.”[18]

For Ralph Waldo Emerson, the transcendentalist and pre-eminant American lecturer, writer and philosopher of the mid-nineteenth century, poor people of all kinds – including poor white Southerners – lived in poverty because of inherent traits in their nature. The poor were “ferried over the Atlantic & carted to America to ditch & to drudge, to make the land fertile … and then to lie down prematurely to make a spot of greener grass…” These people Emerson referred to as “guano” were fated to inhabit the lowest niches of society, and he specifically excluded them from his definition of what an American was. Emerson’s “American” was of Saxon heritage, descended from the Danes, Norsemen, Saxons and Anglo-Saxons, known for their “excess of virility”, their “beastly ferocity”, and – at least in Emerson’s eyes – their beauty. These were not traits which were shared by the poor white Southerner. Americans may have degenerated somewhat in comparison to their ancestors, one of the weakening effects of civilization, but they still maintained their superiority over other “races”, and white Southerners of all kinds, but especially poor ones, were themselves inferior to their countrymen from New England and the north.[19]

Some, such a Theodore Roosevelt, saw poor “degenerate” whites – as well as the mass of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe (those from northern Europe having been accepted in the Ango-Saxon white race) – as being a major part of the problem of “race suicide“, the concept that poor whites and unwanted immigrants would eventually out-procreate those of the dominant and superior white “race”, causing it to die out or be supplanted, to the detriment of the country.[20]

Blacks have always had loathing toward them, first, because they (the white trash) are NOT very nice to them – and second, because – like anyone else – they get off on feeling superior to someone  (probably the same situation exists now with Mexicans).

Poor white trash were generally only able to locate themselves on the worst land in the South, since the best land was taken by the slaveholders, large and small. They lived and attempted to survive on land that was sandy or swampy or covered in scrub pine and not suited for agriculture; for this they became known as “sandhillers” and “pineys”.[12] These “hard-scratch” inhabitants were seen to match their surroundings: they were “stony, stumpy, and shrubby, as they land they lived on.”[13]

Restricted from holding political office due to property qualifications, their ability to vote at the mercy of the courts which were controlled by the slave-holding planters, poor whites had few advocates within the political system or the dominant social hierarchy. Although many were tenant farmers or day laborers, other white trash people were forced to live as scavengers, thieves and vagrants, but all, employed or not, were socially ostracized by “proper” white society by being forced to use the back door when entering “proper” homes. Even slaves looked down on them: when poor whites came begging for food, the slaves called them “stray goats.”[14]

However, like the Irish – the poor whites were simply not getting beat with bullwhips, having their wives raped, their men emasculated.  Later on, they were not getting lynched – hideously tortured (burned alive etc.) – officially segregated against, persecuted with a double-standard regarding sexual relations.

A Barbaric Culture – is the South USA

Yep, you heard it.  But that’s not saying the majority is that way – but only some “bad apples” ruin the bunch.

Like I remember high school – where this guy, otherwise a pretty cool dude, wanted me to yell “Nigger!” at a black actor doing a play!  I refused – cause it was beyond even a high-schooler’s taste.

Now this is the tip of the iceberg, though, as many remark after remark – I had to endure (in my life) – and my disgust is justified – it’s not “The Care Bears” throwing a hissy fit.

Stuff like trailer trash wanting to “cook a niggers head” or “own slaves in modern times”.  How about being called a nigger whenever you show violence?  Oh, of course, these people, though cowards to actual black people’s faces – are always cutting down anyone black – or anything that IS black – the hair, the skin color, the rap – you name it.  😆  “Oh, Color Me Badd are a bunch of nigger queers ha ha”

Now, how is this sweathog “kidding around”?  It isn’t.  The joking around I had when some decent blokes (even tough sweathogs) never got this vulgar or retarded – and I’m totally justified in hating swamp-running illiterate white trash.

Well, my family dismisses them as “idiots” – but we all know the type – and they probably exist outside of the south.  Also, they’re are equally ignorant non-whites out there – whole countries of them!!!

Let’s go thru the Hall of Shame:

  • Pussy nigger  – (directed at White or Black).
  • Nigger queers (color me badd) – I have to chuckle at the retarded-ness.
  • C0ok a nigger’s head.
  • Gook lover.
  • (Looking at scars) “You must have been cut up by some niggers” (a compliment).
  • Afro-American hairdo (White being called that).
  • “Oh look, a  Nigger Mickey Mouse.”
  • Nigger lips.
  • “You suck, nigger” (addressed to White person).

 

Laughed at – Instead of Laughed With

As I mentioned on one post, I had a fun time in this one class (high school), a small engine class.  The guys were these sweathogs – you know, kind of like off “Welcome Back Kotter” or something.   Anyway, we would cut up, insult each other – but nobody took it really serious.

However, though, my situation now (over two decades later) – is not the same.  Basically I’m being made out to be a punk – and that’s not cool!

The problem, though, I feel – isn’t my doing.  Well, it sounds whiny or blame-ish – but I’ll tell you the story.

See, these guys were cool when being un-PC in high school – but now they’ve become very preachy/irritating. They’re always on social media blasting meme after meme on “being a man” – along with the fact we should totally surrender ourselves to capitalism and white identity politics.

Now, me going against this has lead to labels – of cocksucker, bitch, cunt – most of the name thrown at SJWs – when I am by  – no means, anything like that!

I’m just a guy – just like this other – actually popular cool dude (on Facebook) just trying to stand up for truth – a kind of truth, in-between SJW idiocy and white identity idiocy.

There is no reason why I have to be a racist/extreme misogynist jerk-wad to be a man.

So basically, social media has simply allowed me to speak opinions – not in line with what’s popular – and simply assumed to be SJW crybaby stuff.

Alt Left: SJW’s Have Declared War on Normal People and Normal Behavior

Jason:

The whole “macho thing” depends on the occupation. @Robert Lindsay might disagree – but there’s a world of difference from James Taylor singing “Shower Me People” to an auto mechanic crying. One is permissible, the other isn’t.

Anyway, obviously, being sensitive doesn’t work in the teaching, correctional jobs, construction, auto repair – a host of other occupations.

Well, the thing is that apparently I am not macho at all, but I can fake it enough that I have worked in extremely macho workplaces, and those men all pretty much accepted me. You just look at how the other guys act and talk and try to imitate them. If you already have some masculine core from your youth, you can plug into it. It’s not that hard, guys.

Of course women pretty much didn’t accept me because women are far more demanding than men when it comes to masculinity. Toxic masculinity is 100% women’s fault. Men display toxic masculinity because women demand it and won’t accept anything even 1% less. As long as women demand it, men will do it.

At those workplaces, you talk the talk and walk the walk, and everyone will be ok with you. And go along with the general vibes. At this security guard job I had where the atmosphere was extremely macho, the subject of homosexuality came up, and I said, “Fuck fags,” in a sort of disgusted, dismissive, but soft tone of voice. Most of the other guys said, “Yeah. Fuck fags.”

One man said, “Hey, you know in Laguna Beach, they got a fag mayor now! Can you believe that? A fag mayor!” I just shook my head as if to say, “That’s bullshit.” This was 1984, 35 years ago, and it was much more ok to talk like that then than it is now. I was also a lot more homophobic than I am now. I’m not sure I would say that now.

You don’t have to believe the things you say, but it helps to play the part. There aren’t any gay men around, so no one gets hurt. And that talk won’t get anyone hurt because any man who talks that way already is not keen on male homosexuality.

I remember at that same job, this Jamaican guy was walking with me, and I had tied my sweater around my waist. He said, “Damn! You’re embarrassing me!” So I tied it around my neck, and he said, “That’s better.” Apparently he thought tying your sweater around your waist was gay. Maybe it looks like a dress. Sure that’s homophobic but so what? If you are working with a bunch of homophobic guys, you have to play along. You don’t really have a choice.

I sort of agreed with him anyway. From that day on, I never wear my sweater around my waist. I always wear it around my neck instead. I don’t want to look faggy. Hell with that.

One time I was talking about sex with my girlfriend at the time, and I said she stuck her finger up my ass. This caused loud guffaws. One of the guys recoiled and said, “That’s gay! No woman is going to stick her finger up my ass!” I just laughed and said, “So what? I’m getting laid.”

Then another guy (the same guy who talked about the gay mayor) made a huge smile and said, “Is that some good pussy, Bob?” I said, “Yep, real good pussy!” and they all started laughing and saying, “Good pussy!” and slapping each other on the back and giving thumbs up signs.

Of course all of this conversation is banned now as Nazism and evil hatred of women and gays, but the thing is, this is how real masculine man talk and have always talked. And if you go anywhere on Earth, you will find that masculine straight men act approximately this exact same way.

These insane SJW’s are coding what has been normal behavior for thousands of years as evil, hatred, fascism, bigotry, and Nazism. It isn’t any of those things. It’s just the way normal, straight, masculine men normally talk and act, always have, and presumably always will.

I remember back in the wide open 1970’s when things were very liberal and wild, almost all straight men acted exactly like this, and no one cared. There were a few SJW thought police around, but most of the hip people hated them as the killjoys, party-poopers,  prudes, and churchladies that they are. SJW’s are like a dour-faced guy who raids your party and drops a turd in the punch bowl while yelling, “Party’s over!”

Back then, the world would have laughed if SJW’s said, “Mick Jagger said the word bitch. He’s a misogynist and we must boycott all his records!”

If they said, “Johnny Rotten said the words cunt and fag. He’s a misogynist and a homophobe. Everyone boycott his records,” everyone, including every punk on Earth would have laughed right in their faces.

Leftwing men have turned into the most pathetic bunch of sissified girlymen on Earth.

SJW’s have declared war on people, especially men, acting normal.

Alt Left: Can You Change Your Sexual Orientation?

Jay:

Robert have you heard of shift in sexual identity.

I have been studying this issue for years now. Frankly there are hardly any people studying this issue and almost everything you hear about sexual orientation is nonsensical lie. Research into this matter is being held up by Gay Identity Politics. I am probably one of the few people in this country who is actually studying this issue.

You mean sexual orientation, right? It doesn’t happen in men, except maybe in prepubertal boys. Men don’t change at all. Sexual orientation in men is frozen at age 15, if not sooner. We know this because many males have tried to change their sexual orientation in lab over many decades. All efforts to increase heterosexual attraction and decrease homosexual attraction failed. So not only could gays not be turned straight, but a 10-90 couldn’t even turn into a 20-80.

We don’t know if straight men can turn gay  because no one ever shows up in the lab wanting to do that, but it doesn’t seem like it. There was a case in the Archives of Sexual Behavior about a college man who desperately wanted to turn gay but was utterly failing to do so. He had tried everything and was at his wit’s end when he showed up for therapy.

It would seem that heterosexual attraction cannot be decreased, and homosexual attraction cannot be increased. We men are SOL. Whatever you are, you are. Be happy with your orientation. You probably didn’t create it, and you can’t change it. And let’s quit beating up on men for things they can’t change!

I’m not sure about women. Women seem to be able to add on a new attraction. Many straight women add on a bi attraction. Many lesbians cannot seem to change at all for some reason. There are women who claim that they change from lesbian to straight. No one really knows what is going on with them, but in one case I am aware of, Bill DiBlasio’s wife, her sexual orientation did not change. There are straight women who claim to go lesbian, often due to feminism, but many lesbian feminists do not have sex, which implies that their true orientation did not change.

It looks like once an attraction is acquired in a certain strength by a certain age, it cannot be reduced or eliminated. It’s just stuck for life. The question revolves around whether new attractions can be created on increased or eliminated if they already exist. The jury is open on that, but in men it looks like it’s not possible.

Probably straight women cannot turn lesbian because a hard attraction to men will be for life. Probably a lesbian cannot turn straight because a hard attraction to women is for life. I have talked to a few lesbians who were having sex with men, and they told me that their orientations had not changed (10-90’s) in the few years they had been having sex with men. One told me, “I can’t help it.” It’s time we show kindness to true biological homosexuals.

Sexual activity, identification and orientation are not the same. 95% of all gay men are biologically gay and cannot be changed. However, I am aware of a few cases of straight men living a gay lifestyle simply because women did not like them. I am also aware of cases where men with an apparent bisexual orientation and a lot of experience with women until college decided to live a gay lifestyle.

So most gay men are biologically gay, but a few are straight or bisexual men who have simply chosen to live a gay lifestyle.

Traditional Christianity – Basically False

Well, I’m not the most religious person.  However, I can attest to the fact traditional Christianity is basically false – basically meaning people who rebel against it are highly justified.  I mean, why shouldn’t music artists worship the devil or favor other non-conformist attitudes?

Why is it not justified? Well, it all seems subjective, but really think about it:

  • The traditional idea of hell is against God’s loving nature.  I mean, the world sucks enough as it is – but then torture someone from eternity – not even a billion years – LOL?  And this even being done – not only to child rapists, but also just bearded hipsters (just kidding).
  • Eternal Hell provides no real correction.  I mean, even prison government agencies are called “Departments of Correction”.
  • Why should anyone love and worship such a being?  And notice how FAKE Christians are – it’s not surprising – look at the theology.
  • A lot of people had never heard of the gospel message.  However, according to traditional Christians, their ignorance – justifies ETERNAL DAMNATION. 😆
  • Babies and Mentally Disabled People in Hell?  Apparently, old-school Christians would justify this.  For instance, Catholics demanded babies be baptized or else – ETERNAL DAMNATION
  • No consistency in Protestant thinking.  I mean, if Catholics were wrong about the Pope according to them – why wouldn’t also THE WHOLE CATHOLIC THING – be wrong?  The Hell idea came from the Catholics!
  • No eternal security for many denominations including Catholic – the largest one.   This basically means – committing any mortal sin – which is any fun one – when dying – commits you to ETERNAL HELL
  • Some people actually believe in Double Predestination – which basically says “God chooses who goes to heaven and hell – and those who complain are – guess this – being whiny!
  • Hell has actual flames – that are never-ending, when simple boredom experienced in a prison (in real life) is verified torture.

Why do people hold on to traditional religion? Well, apparently Christians think God has to be this hyper-masculine monster who tortures people  in hell FOR ETERNITY.

Also, they hold to doctrines where – thinking is discouraged, so nobody questions what they say – even if, taken logically, to come to pure bullshit.

What is the truth?

I think hell is of a temporary nature – humane and just – until someone is cleansed of sin.  The Bible – taken in it’s true translation backs this.  No time for specifics, you can look it up!  However, I don’t think “all ways to God” are right – but I think there is some mercy in finding “the one true way”.

Bearded Hipsters Who Can’t Change a Tire?

This is unbelievable!

Anyway, I know this is a pro-hyper-masculine blog – but, honestly, so much of this stuff is “bandwagon”.  It’s just as dumb as disco suits or sporting a Chicago Bulls hat (in the 90s).

Well, one problem I have with these bozos – is that they really haven’t deserved the honor of a beard – even if they can do manly things.  I mean, did they lose their legs like Lieutenant Dan (in Forrest Gump)?

Come on!  These guys look like Eddie Munster with a beard.  You can’t even tell who the 18 year old guys are these days!  Oh, whose the professor, is he sitting in the class or on the podium?

Prison Sexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_sexuality

Who would truly be strong enough to resist “punking out” in a prison?  Well, actually the dominant ones aren’t considered punk – but they’re – just as gay.

From 1931 research:

These are families women create in prison that provide them support, bonds and relationships, like a traditional family would. Typically, only the main couple in the family has sexual relations. The women take on masculine and feminine roles to mimic a real family. “Mammy” or “mumsy” is given to the older, maternal woman in the family, while “Popsy” is given to the dominant woman, who is least feminine. These “parents” are typically older and are seen as mentors to younger inmates. Roles within pseudofamilies are flexible and can change with time.[6]

Modern:

In homosexual relationships, sexual types for women include: “butch” or “daddy” refers to the masculine female who is dominant. The “femme” or “mommy” is the submissive one. A “trick” is a girl who allows herself to be used by others. A “commissary hustler” is manipulative. “Cherries” have never had lesbian experiences and a “square” will not take part in homosexual acts.[4]

Modern:

Heterosexual men in prison view their homosexual acts as being “situation specific” and may not consider themselves bisexual. These men often describe how they imagine being with a woman while taking part in sexual activity with a male inmate. During masturbation, they picture past sexual experiences with women.[9] They take part in homosexual activity due to having no “heterosexual outlets”.[6]

A dominant sexual partner in prison is called “daddy” while their submissive partner is called “kid” or “girl”. The dominant partner has their mate take on the feminine role in order to feel more masculine and powerful.[10]

Charleston’s Slave Markets

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/spotlight/how-the-elegant-city-of-charleston-is-facing-up-to-its-troubling-past/ar-AABfEnv

My meanderings are punctuated by churches. Charleston’s picturesque peninsula was a refuge for nonconformist Christians, as well as Jews, and “The Holy City” still hosts a multitude of Christian buildings of diverse architecture and denomination, as well as a historic synagogue.

Certainly the WNs will focus on the synagogue – LOL.

Non-conformist Christian as in what? Satanist? 😆

Yeah, all the “southern-ish” bearded hipsters now in coffee shops – but slave shops back in the day!   Well, I’m not shocked!

But it’s the innocent-looking information boards on the ground floor that lodge in my brain: they describe the busy auctions that took place in the now-quiet square – auctions of enslaved people. “Some 40 per cent of the estimated 388,000 Africans brought to America as slaves came through this city,” says historian Ruth Miller, my knowledgeable guide. “Odds are, almost every African American can trace blood lines back to Charleston”.

Also, oddly enough, the Civil War started there.

This small museum of personal testimonies and evocative objects (including manacles) occupies the site of the indoor slave market that replaced the one at the Old Exchange. Christine holds a poster for a sale here in 1860. A 12-year-old boy was sold (alone) for $940 (about $24,000 today), a 15-year-old girl for $1,275. “I honour my ancestors by talking about them as people, not property,” she says. “My great-grandparents were enslaved… they survived this for me.”

It’s amazing how African-Americans fell in value to from a new car each (an average new car in today’s terms – to being utter pests – so despised by conservatives, WNs etc..)

“You see, it isn’t just history,” sighs Christine Mitchell, welcoming me to Charleston’s Old Slave Mart Museum. Whitewashing is still a big problem, she says, and (though legally ended in 1968) segregation is alive and kicking. Certainly, I have seen a minuscule number of the black people who make up 40 per cent of the city’s population.

It’s certainly not a culturally integrated city – unofficially.  But – I think it’s due to the blacks – not the whites (to a large degree).

The Jews Owning Slaves – and Other Lies

In more of the “blame game”, racists now want to say Jews owned slaves – to deflect criticism – much as they also want to do the same with The Holly-Hoax – lol.

However,the fact remains that the Southern Whites were not dupes in a Jewish scheme. They fought whole-heartily for the preservation of slavery and also highly supported future African-American oppression.

Now as for other lies – some white nationalists want to present the image that skid-row whites or white racist elitists have views – that represent those of current working class whites.  Nope!  Not the case, homey!!

Who are white racist elitists?

Well, I have mentioned them a few times.  They range from David Duke – to stupid punks at a community college.  Anyhow, these people – are without excuse. It’s not like with certain skid-row whites – where bad experiences/poverty allow for justifiable hate/racism.

Beats me as to why they (white racist elitists) are they way they are. I take it that it’s mostly culture (privileged culture) combined with ignorance – and well, they’ve just never experienced what it’s like being fucked – as opposed to fucking.

No Future for Black State

Well, at least not for poor blacks.  However, this is the “wet dream” of white nationalists and others.  And, of course, they criticize – even race realist liberals, as “bourgeois liberals” – a polite term for “liberal elitists” or “mini-Mr. Drummonds” from Different Strokes (the TV show) – lol.

However, the fact is that poor blacks cannot succeed on their own. In fact, the slaveholders of past centuries were totally right about it.   So the fact of the matter is that typical white racists have no working solution for poor blacks – and also, of course, traditional liberals don’t.  The right is totally correct in showing how Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society failed – how “poor blacks given money” has only destroyed poor Black America.

Well, one alternate solution given by white racists – is to put the poor blacks under the care of richer blacks in a segregated state (black-a-block among blacks).  But would that really work?  Well, there is simply too many poor blacks for the small black middle/upper class.   In that case, you’d just have a repeat of Haiti – with a large black underclass – and a heartless mulatto elite.

Anyway of course, the real reason that racists hate @Robert Lindsay’s Black a Block theory- is because they HATE black people.  They deny it, but it’s obvious.  They cannot even tolerate a place like Appalachia or Portugal – where the blacks are spread out to where – they’re practically invisible!

But this figures for skid-row whites or white racist elitists.

Autistic People in the Hate Movement

Why are autistic people – some of them – drawn toward misogyny, racism etc.?  Well, I suspect this hate comes from bad experiences – and I especially think it comes from anti-disabled prejudice.  In other words, certain women and blacks etc.. are not understanding of the disabled.  They bully the disabled.  An autistic person, whose behavior triggers it (gawking) or maybe not, gets on the bad side of people.

I mean, come on!  People don’t hate for no reason.  More than not, there was bad experiences.  However, though, I do admit I’ve seen some elitist jerks (at colleges, military etc..) who are simply are in a hyper-right-wing culture – and the way to fit in is to be bigoted.