Alt Left: Meritocracy and Crime in Communist Countries

In the West, there is this idea that the Left hates the idea of a meritocracy. They’re not wrong. Meritocracies end up creating inequalities among races and genders, and we can’t have that. So we have to rig the game to make sure the lesser are the same as the greater and that way, everyone’s nice and equal.

The thing is that this was never a Left notion. All of the former and absolutely all of the present Communist states were complete meritocracies, even multiracial ones like Cuba. The claim is that racial politics disappears under Communism. The idea is that all of that has been taken care of by economics already, so there’s no need to do anything more. I’m not sure if that’s true, but Communism definitely lessens racial and ethnic conflict. Look at the Balkans.

The USSR, China, the Eastern Bloc, Cuba, all have or had extremely rigorous testing procedures, and their educational systems were quite good. You didn’t cut it on testing in the USSR, you were out of that track, but they would just find another one that suited you better. No Communist country ever lowered standards to even things up. Just because they’re Commies doesn’t mean they’re stupid!

Cuba definitely has a Black problem. Not like the one we have here, but it’s there nonetheless. Cuba has quite a prison system and they imprison quite a percentage of their population. I saw a photo of a Cuban prison once and there were mostly young Black male faces. However, Cuban prisons do operate on a rehabilitation, not a punishment model. In spite of the full prisons, Havana is probably the least dangerous large city in Latin America, and it’s full of Black people!

The Cubans have adopted a 60’s sociological “culture of poverty” theory based on Oscar Lewis’ theories of the 1960’s (see The Children of Sanchez for more) to explain Black behavior.

One thing that is interesting is that the Blacks in Cuba are not particularly violent or crime-prone compared to American Blacks. I’m convinced that the viciously competitive capitalist system in which so many Blacks are doomed to be on the bottom no matter how hard they try results in envious fury in Blacks (and who could blame them?) and probably causes a lot of the crime and violence here in the US.

American society says if you’re not making good money, you’re a loser and a POS. Black culture or biology or both makes it hard for them to get ahead. Every time the Black guy turns on the TV, it’s screaming in his face, calling him a loser because he’s not rich. You know that’s got to hurt. The Black guy swears that he’s going to get rich one way or another, come Hell or high water. Hence, crime.

There are absolutely many great things about capitalism (Hell, even Marx admitted that), but crime is not one of them. The link between capitalism and crime is robust. Basically, more capitalism, more crime. Less capitalism, less crime. Greed makes people do a lot of bad things. Even Jesus knew that.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Breonna Taylor, Drug Dealer

About the well-publicized death of Breonna Taylor by police bullets in Louisville, Kentucky, the Cultural Left says the raid on Taylor’s apartment in which she was tragically killed was actually at the wrong apartment. As with just about everything the Cultural Left says about all these cases, this is one more flat-out lie.

I read the 12-page search warrant for the raid on Breonna’s apartment. They definitely had adequate probable cause for a raid.

The raid was at the right house.

The main drug dealer in the investigation, her ex, was seen leaving her house with a UPS package and driving to the drug house with it. He was receiving all of his mail at her address, mail which included these packages that he was taking to the drug house. On another occasion, police observed the ex come to Breonna’s apartment and look behind some rocks. He pulled out a package that was hidden behind the rocks. He got in his car and drove with the package to the drug house where he was dealing cocaine and heroin.

There were obviously drugs in both of those packages. The ex listed her apartment as his residence, and he was no doubt getting UPS packages of drugs sent to her residence, picking them up, and driving them to the drug house.

Breonna was obviously allowing her place to be used as a place for her ex to receive drugs via the mail to take over to the drug house. Also, her vehicle was seen at the drug house where her ex was selling drugs on multiple occasions. She herself was seen at the drug house on multiple occasions.

Breonna got mixed up with this ex, Javarious, and he took her down a dark path. He was a drug dealer the whole time she was with him and afterwards too.

The Body of a Murdered Man Was Found in the Driver’s Seat of Breonna’s Car

At one time Breonna was a suspect in a homicide investigation because a the body of a murdered man was found slumped over the steering wheel in her vehicle. Turns out she had loaned the car to Javarious, who loaned it to someone else, then the someone else person ended up being caught up in an apparent drug-related homicide.

Breonna visited Javarious many times at jail and often sent him packages there. She also took a lot of calls from him in the jail. Javarious complained to friends that Breonna still had $14,000 of his money. He also told friends, “Breonna’s holding all the money. All the money is in her name (in bank accounts).” That has to be drug money he’s talking about. So she was holding his dope money for him too, almost $15,000 worth.

The Cultural Left never talked about the drug dealing.

The police did indeed knock loudly and announce their presence. The police said they did so multiple times, and a neighbor heard them do it once. Breonna’s boyfriend said he never heard police announcing their presence. He thought it was Javarious coming back to bash in the door and invade the home. However, Javarious was on good terms with Breonna, so he would not have done that.

The boyfriend and Breonna were in bed watching a movie. The boyfriend armed himself with a handgun, and he and Breonna made their way to the hallway with a view of the door. They were both spread out on the floor of the hallway. The boyfriend was pointing his gun at the door. She was stretched out right next to him. The police burst in the door, and the boyfriend started shooting. One shot hit a police officer in the leg. That officer and another officer then returned fire, an act that was proper and just. Tragically, Breonna was killed by six bullets. The boyfriend may have been wounded.

Yes, Breonna was a ghetto Black, but I don’t think all ghetto Blacks are bad people. A lot of them are but a lot of others are more or less ok. I wouldn’t want to associate with them, but they aren’t flat-out evil. Breonna Taylor was neither a good person nor a bad person. She did some good things in life, and she did some bad things, too.

Mostly she made a terrible mistake getting involved with a dangerous Black drug dealer and getting all wrapped up in his drug dealing game. You hang around ghetto Black drug houses all the time and get involved with these ghetto Black drug dealers who happen to live the sort of lives where homicide is never far away, and you might just end up dead. That’s a dangerous life to live.

The death of Breonna Taylor was simply a tragic error if the boyfriend is correct that they did not hear the police announce their presence. However, the police did nothing wrong, and this was no “police murder” of an innocent Black person. It was simply a tragic error. She also set herself up with an incident like this by getting deeply involved with a ghetto Black drug dealer. And if she herself was involved in the dealing, which looks like it may be the case, then she’s not so innocent after all. She still didn’t deserve to die, but she was also no angel.

Most of these Blacks getting killed by police frankly deserve what they got. However, I do not feel that way about Breonna Taylor. But neither was it some evil racist White policeman murdering another poor Black person.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Great Replacement is No Conspiracy Theory

The Cultural Left says that the Great Replacement Theory, which states that Whites are being replaced in their own lands, is a “conspiracy theory.” This means it’s not so. It’s not happening. It’s all a big lie. The (((SPLC))) is particularly big on this.

But (((Mark Potok))), a particularly obnoxious SPLC attorney, actually has a calendar in his office counting down the years to when Whites will be a minority in the US. This is obviously something that this man is very much looking forward to. I assume he is also pushing  the notion that The Great Replacement is a fake conspiracy theory too. Yeah, a fake conspiracy theory that he himself believes in and participates in. I really hate people like Mark Potok. He’s so disgustingly dishonest. I’m sick and tired of liars. I get lied to all day long every single day and after a while, it really gets old.

Isn’t it obviously a fact that we Whites are being displaced in our lands? I’m not saying it’s good or bad. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad depending on your perspective. I’m not even sure it’s been done on purpose or with malice. It may just be accidental or a side effect of some other goal.

But the fact that we are being replaced is utterly uncontroversial, right? I’m sure we could even prove scientifically that we’re being replaced.

How can saying that Whites are being  replaced in their lands possibly be hate speech? It’s true. It’s a fact. It’s even a scientific fact. How can facts be hate speech? How does that even make sense? According to the Cultural Left, the truth itself or better yet reality itself, is hate. Observation of reality and reporting what you see with your senses is hate speech.

Reality is hate. Observation of reality is hate speech. The world has gone completely bonkers.

We are being gaslighted in the worst possible way. We are being told that reality itself is a lie. We are being told that there are two realities. The real reality, which we can take in with our senses, is apparently all fake! And some fake or fictional reality that doesn’t even exist is actual reality! From an ontological point of view, that’s very disturbing. You keep getting told and after a while you are going to wonder which reality you are in, the real one that is fake or the fake one that is real.

I was driving in the mountains near the Creek Fire the other and thinking about this. I looked out at the expanse of forest rolling by my windows and I started thinking, “Are these trees even real? How do I know they’re even real? Am I really seeing them? Do they exist in actual reality or in some fictional reality. It was disturbing as Hell to think like this.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Banned from Reddit Again

First I got banned again from the r/politics subreddit. Again. For hate speech. This time they had a post about the “conspiracy theory” that Whites are being replaced in White countries. The entire Left, especially the SPLC types who originally labeled this a conspiracy theory, actually believes that this is a crazy bug-eyed conspiracy theory.

They actually believe this. They think it is literally on the level of Qanon and the idea that the Newton School Shooting was faked with crisis actors. No really. They actually believe this. Isn’t it incredible that a majority of Americans could believe something so stupid and insane?

I made a post that said it’s not a conspiracy theory. This is what I said:

It’s actually true. We Whites are absolutely being replaced here in the US. Now, one can argue about whether it is being done deliberately or not, but it’s absolutely true.

Banned! It’s hate speech! It’s hate speech to say the truth that we Whites are being replaced in our countries, especially here in the US. How on Earth is this not true? How in God’s name are we not being replaced? Isn’t it obvious? Those who claim this is conspiracy theory: Can you show us how we are not being replaced? It’s literally an obvious truth, a fact, a scientific fact that this is what is happening.

How could truths, facts, and even scientific facts possibly be racist? You mean there are racist facts? That’s insane. How could a fact possibly be racist? That’s literally not even possible. If it’s true, it literally cannot be racist. It’s simply a truth and truths are neither racist nor non-racist nor do they carry any subjective values at all. Truths are simply objective truths, sitting there in plain sight for all to see, without the slightest subjectivity, emotion, or God forbid bigotry, coloring  them.

How can anyone get banned from a website for telling the truth? How does that make sense?

Anyway, they found out that I was using a new alt account to evade a ban on that sub and they banned me for seven days. I wasn’t aware that I was avoiding a previous ban. It never occurred to me.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Birth of the Cultural Left Analysis: Did the Black Panthers Hate Whites?

I think the Panthers are still around, but they are not very active. I actually don’t mind them. They did a lot of really cool things like free breakfasts and lunches for school children. They have been superseded by the New Black Panther Party, an explicitly racist organization that actively promotes hatred of Whites. The real Panthers recently criticized the NBP for hating Whites, saying that the original Panthers were never about hating Whites; instead they just wanted equal rights for Blacks.

The rightwing recently has published some articles suggesting that the Panthers hated Whites. To my recollection, they did not. They helped the Weathermen break Tim Leary out of prison, and they visited him in Algeria, where some of them (Kwame Ture nee Eldridge Cleaver of Soul on Ice fame) had also taken refuge. A lot of radical Whites worked hand in hand with the Panthers.

The Panthers were Marxists (actually Maoists) of that particular er, which would coincide with the Cultural Revolution period in China. Think of how culturally conservatives the Chinese Communist Party was at this time. That’s what the Panthers were like.

They were strongly against degeneracy of any type as most Communist parties (CP’s) were at that time. Some Panthers were openly homophobic, saying homosexuality was a bourgeois vice, a popular view among CP’s of that time (See the Cuban leadership’s position on this subject in the 1960’s). They certainly didn’t promote Black crime, drug use, or even irresponsible behavior.

I will say that Farrakhan’s (whom I very much dislike) people are huge on social responsibility too, and I appreciate them for that. They are very much into clean living and non-degeneracy, and they despise Black crime.

I came out of the cultural revolutions of the 1960’s, which is why probably why some people are shocked at how leftwing I am. They’re blown away when they figure that out about me. “Wow, I didn’t realize he was so leftwing!” Well, I am. I’m race realist though and hate the Cultural Left. I’m a “conservative socialist.”

Hell, I was on the mailing list for the Weatherman at one point not even long ago! Well, their above ground organization that is (the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee), which frankly has strong links to this BLM movement right now. So, yes, the present Weathermen (now given up arms as a peaceful organization) are very much behind BLM.

My friends were drug dealers who hung out with Tim Leary and the Brotherhood of Eternal Love in Laguna Canyon in Laguna Beach where the BEL made and distributed millions of tabs of Orange Sunshine LSD.I remember my friends telling me about going to parties in the canyon and how they had lookouts high up in the eucalyptus trees to watch out for cops. I did go to a party in the Canyon once, a real hippie party with real hippie chicks and lots of pot smoking. Love was definitely in the air.

I have supported Latin American guerrilla groups. I actually gave to the “weapons fund” for the Salvadoran guerrillas for some time. So I’m actually a real dyed in the wool terrorist supporter or even financier if you will, although I stopped giving them money long ago.

If I did that now, I would be violating the Patriot Act by giving Material Support for Terrorism (Whatever the Hell that means!), and I could be looking at 10 years. But alas, those were different times. Even the 80’s were far more laid back, relaxed, and anti-authoritarian compared to now when we seem to be on some weird authoritarian trip due to fears over “terrorism” which is about nonexistent in the US.

Anyway, this was a time of peace, love, dope and all that. Everyone was very much into nonviolence to the point of near-passivity. Any aggressive behavior was “uncool.” Every hippie man was your brother, and every hippie woman was your sister. There was magic in the air. And Yoko brought her walrus, don’t forget that.

Plus there was lots of “free love.” I still have fond memories of hippie chicks. I will say it was a lot more loving and friendly than things are nowadays with all this weirdness, antisociality, fear of strangers and single men, “pedophile” hysteria, #metoo insanity, and general fear or even terror of men – and this at a time when major crimes like rape have crashed 63% since  1993.

Sometimes I think the lower the crime rate goes, the more paranoid people get about crime. Don’t ask me to figure it out. I have no idea why humans do whatever irrational thing du jour they happen to be doing.

Bottom line is that humans are basically irrational and illogical at their core and we tend to be driven around all through life by our emotional needs and beliefs, which often seem to be pulling us through life blindly on a leash like a dog ownder, not even why we do or feel certain things.

I can’t tell you how many of my female clients have asked me, “Why do I feel this way?”  The answer was not readily apparent. Obviously it’s happening for a reason, probably an  unconscious one. Then they ask me, “How do I stop feeling  this way (getting dragged through life with their emotions like a dog an a leash)?” It’s hard to answer questions like that. The solutions are there no doubt, but they are more tangled up in the forbidding jungle of the psyche than we want  to admit.

The only answer I would have to taht question would be to develop some “emotional literacy,” to try to develop and cultivate at least some  emotional control. My emotions don’t drag me through life blindly, baffled at why I am doing or feeling  this or that. I

t’s more the opposite. Whereas with many people, including  most women for sure, their emotions are dragging through them through their lives blindly, with me it’s the other way around. I have my emotions on a leash and I drag them around. I’d rather drag my emotions through life in my own leash than the other way around. Control gets a bad rap, but a lot of forms of it

Anyway, the Panthers were just Black hippies. They hung out with the White hippies. Black hippies were “brothers,” or “soul brothers,” if you will. There were some problems with them of course (they are Blacks after all), but most of them were quite well-behaved or at least much  better behaved than they are now. I suspect the demand for nonviolence in the hippie movement weeded out the bad ones. There may have been some self-selection going  on.

Bottom line is I really disagree that the Panthers were White-haters. It’s BS.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: How We Got Here: The Origins of Identity Politics and the Modern Cultural Left

There is a ready explanation for all this nonsense.

First is the tendency of Identity Politics to become more radicalized with time.

There has long been an argument on the Left against this BS. Sanders actually came out of that tradition.

The US White Left married with the radical Blacks. After they did that they started heading down this nutty race train track along with all the other IdPol madness.

Really the Left moved away from economics and foreign policy to go down this cultural road instead. Perhaps 1989 was a trigger. The Eastern Bloc collapsed and the US Left was in disarray and didn’t know what to think or even believe. The dictatorship of he proletariat, democratic centralism, it was all up in the air now. Further it seemed the Communist economics in the East Bloc had not kept pace with socialist social democracy economics on the rest of Europe. A lot of the US Left packed it in on economics and started to focus on this cultural BS instead.

The Left now is nothing but pure IdPol. Ever see BLM or these Antifa morons say one word about US foreign policy and US imperialism? Course not. Ever hear them say one word about neoliberal economics? Course not. That’s what drives me up the wall. Here is a movement ripe for radicalizing against the US ruling class program of neoliberalism at home and invite the world – invade the word neoconservatism abroad. Let’s call this combined package Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism.

That’s a rightwing project any way you slice it. But at the same time, the ruling class went full left on culture. Hence the Libertarian type fiscal conservative-social liberal of the upper middle class in the last 40 years. Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism plus the Cultural Left. What a project! It’s literally the worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right! And the upper middle class is proud of this nightmare ideology. Which is one more reason that this class, which always sides with the ruling class against the workers, is no good.

Now that the Left bailed on anti-imperialism and left economics in favor of a pure Cultural Left, what are they doing with this new ideology? Why, they are rioting about nothing at all or at worst for an outright lie. Brilliant!

But if we get police reform out of these riots, it would be good. It’s an ill wind that blows no good.

Thing is the corporations, foundations, media, etc. and both political parties are down with this Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project because they’re a bunch of businessmen and rich people, and Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism is good for them for reasons I won’t go into here but perhaps you can guess at.

This Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism project is how the rich, the corporations, and the U.S. ruling class make all their damned money. So they oppose Left efforts against Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism such as the 60’s revolutions with all out ferocity. If such a movement arises, they will sic their media attack dogs on it, smash it to bits, and brainwash the sheep with their media monopoly to go along with this destruction.

The thing is that this is a perfectly safe progressive project. It doesn’t cost them one nickel, and they get groovy hip woke points for jumping on the bandwagon.

How much of the US ruling class are going to lose out on an anti-White project? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an unqualified Black in affirmative action? 0%.

How many of them will be replaced by an illegal alien on their jobs? 0%. Illegals are great for them – cheap labor, more customers, a guy to mow the lawn, and a nanny to watch the kid. They don’t live with illegals so they don’t have to deal with the civilizational decline that they cause. Pro-immigration is risk-free progressivism for woke points, and what do you know? It stuffs their pocketbook too! Win-win!

Does the US ruling class have to live with the consequences of Black crime and civilizational collapse? Course not. They don’t have to deal with the downside of this crazy movement so they can support it all they want to. See?

Also the US ruling class has been socially liberal and Neoliberal-Neoconservative for a long time now.

The Left won the Culture War.

But so what?

We lost the war about economics and foreign policy (US imperialism). They even defeated the Vietnam War Syndrome, a bad thing because it posed a severe threat to US imperialism.

So shat did we win?

Our women have become insane, manhating harridans. Asking a woman for a date is now a firing offense. We overthrew Patriarchy but replaced it with something worse – Matriarchy or Female Rule (Feminist Rule) – with all the manhating, war on male sexuality, and horrific puritanism that always goes along with it every time it is ever done in time and space.

The latter is most painful to me as a 60’s child. One of the revolutions was the Sexual Revolution. Our attitude was “do it in the streets!” Now look. If I ask a woman for her #, I almost get the cops called on me. All sexuality has been sucked out of public space by #metoo so it feels like a sexual desert, which is apparently the way women want it! They actually like to live like this.

And at the same time as this crazy Victorianism, we also have a society drenched in porn. So my personal world is porn saturated, but if I look at a woman, she acts like she’s going to call the cops. How’s that for crazy cognitive dissonance. No wonder incels exist and go on killing sprees. Societies can’t handle grotesque cognitive dissonance. It literally drives people insane and often results in serious violence.

What else did we win? Modern anti-racism – a movement with great roots that has gone insane and is worse than useless.

What else? Depraved, disgusting, and lewd gay pride parades. Great! My favorite!

Mass movements towards bisexuality in both sexes. Gross!

“Pansexuals,” “queer” as a noun, “genderqueer,” “nonbinary” morons, and the insane and depraved transgender cult. It gets sicker and more perverted, weird, stupid, and insane every year. What’s next? Transsexual bathhouses for all ages? Probably. Back then, we fought for liberation, not weirdness, sickness, perversion, and deviancy.

Further, these Cultural Left boneheads have badly divided the working class. Check out this great plan they had!

Let’s have a revolution!

Cool! Yay!

But first lets get all the non-White workers to hate the White workers!

Cool! Yay! Oppressors and oppressed!

And while we’re at it, let’s get the woman workers to hate the man workers! Oppressors and oppressed!

Cool! Yay!

Now let’s have a revolution, boys and girls!

Whoops. Whoa! What happened?

No one showed up! That’s what happened.

Why? Because we got them all to hate each other!

Brilliant! You got to hand it to these guys with these genius ideas of theirs.

What I mean is this Cultural Left project is easy for the ruling class to swallow. Many are already decadent, depraved rich people, so this sicko stuff works for them. Rich men get all the sex they want. If a rich man asks a woman for her #, does she threaten to call the cops? Course not.

Homosexuality? The ruling class is always full of gay men and all manner of decadent bisexual libertines. Works for them.

Trannies? Cut into the bottom line? Course not. Support.

The ruling class has been left on social BS and right on economics (neoliberalism) and on foreign policy (US imperialism) for a long time now. It works for them and doesn’t cost them a nickel! Hell, it even makes them bank too!

And you see the outgrowth of this lousy ideology in this idiot, destructive BLM movement that makes the Black workers hate the White workers and vice versa.

Brilliant! Way to go, Lefties! Why didn’t I think of that?

The ruling class loves this because they benefit by dividing the workers and getting them all to hate each other so they won’t organize against the Neoliberalism-Neoconservatism bread and butter issues of the ruling class.

It also explains why BLM won’t dare touch economics or US imperialism.

See all those corporate and foundation millions flooding into BLM?

Kiss them all goodbye once BLM goes after neoliberal economics and neoconservative foreign policy, for this is what fills the bank vaults of the corporations and ruling class.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Repost: Down with Colin Flaherty

This is a nice old post about Colin Flaherty. I like it and I think it’s worth a repost.

The problem is that Colin Flaherty’s whole shtick is that he is not racist at all in any way whatsoever! No, really. That’s exactly what he says. And that’s how he comes across, endlessly, in article after article and video after video. And that is exactly why this man is so dangerous.

Mr. Flaherty is a journalist and a good one at that. But in his middle age, he has decided to branch out into the area of Black crime, except that his focus has a twist – it’s all about Black crime against Whites. The subtext of every Flaherty article or video is that Black people are deliberately singling out Whites to attack as hunters single out prey. Nothing could be more nonsensical. Blacks do not preferentially prey on Whites. It’s nonsense.

89% of Black homicides are of other Black people. Most Black crime is Black on Black crime. Much is made of Black men raping White women, but Black men rape Black women at 5X the rate that they rape White women. There are all sorts of nutty arguments that try to deal with these uncomfortable truths while keeping the lousy theory alive.

The principal one was symbolized by the noted theory of Le Griffe du Lion, a very racist White professor of…get this…sociology! He did some fancy mathematics showing that Black people mostly see other Black people all day long and don’t see many White people. So of course they prey mostly on their own kind. That’s who they are around all the time! If Blacks were around Whites just as much as they were around Blacks, their propensity to hunt Whites preferentially as a predator hunts its prey (Le Griffe’s exact words) would come out.

But the other side can play that game too. There are 6X more Whites than Blacks. If Blacks displayed no preference at all in victims, they would kill 6X more Whites than Blacks, right? This argument spouts the rejoinder of “But they are only around their own kind all day…” which is probably a tautology and is certainly not falsifiable, so it fails as theory on its face.

Flaherty wrote a book called White Girl Bleed a Lot. It’s all about Black crime against Whites. Yes, Blacks commit some very bad crimes against Whites. But they commit just as bad or worse crimes against their own kind. So only writing about Black crime against Whites is lying in a sense, and worse, you are selling a form of poison to the masses. Racist poison. A really nasty racist poison.

Because nothing drives Whites up the wall more than the idea that Blacks preferentially prey on them as victims. Some of these theorists even go as far as to say that Blacks are waging a low-level guerrilla war against Whites. Oh, what nonsense.

But if you study ethnic conflicts all over the world, one of the things that sets off massacres and ethnic cleansings is the notion that Group B, the outgroup or the other guys, is trying to kill us, Group A.

Hitler set off the genocide by saying the Jews were trying to exterminate Germans.

The Rwandan genocide was set off in the same way.

The Sunni-Shia wars start off in exactly the same way. ISIS propaganda goes to great lengths to show how the Shia are preferentially singling out and slaughtering the Sunni. “They’re trying to kill us all,” is the message.

This was the line that the Young Turks used to kill 1.7 million Armenians. “The Armenians were starting a war against the Turks, and they were trying to kill all the Turks.”

The genocide against Muslims in Bosnia was set off by Serbian lies that “The Muslims were trying to kill the Serbs.”

Even the anti-Communist slaughters of the last century which the US fully participated in, each and every one of them, were all predicated on the idea that the Communist killers were going to seize power and kill lots of people. Hitler justified his genocide against the Jews by saying that they were Communists and that the Communists were mass murderers who were “killing millions of Christians” in the Ukraine. Yes, the fake Holodomor, the terror famine that never even happened, was used as a pretext for the Holocaust.

Remember that the next time any of you wants to rant about “Stalin’s terror famine.” Every time you say that, you are repeating Nazi propaganda. Does it make you feel good to parrot Hitler?

Many of the massacres of Indians were predicated on the notion that the Indians “were coming to kill us all.” In the original wording of the Declaration of Independence, there is language about how savage the Indians fought, knowing none of the rules of decency in wartime. “They’re savages, so we need to kill them all.” See how that works?

In Indonesia in 1965, there was supposedly a Communist coup to take over the government. All the world’s media reported it exactly that way. Except that it never happened. There was a fake Communist coup to take over the government. “The Communists tried to take over, and they are going to kill millions of people” lie was then used as an excuse to kill 1 million Communists all over Indonesia in only a few months. Most were hacked to death with machetes. Islamic fundamentalists were used by the US and Indonesia in this slaughter. Remind you of anything? Afghanistan, anyone?

The CIA was on the scene immediately and they supplied the new government with lists of known Communists. These lists were then used to single out people for killing. The US media then lied about the whole affair, with the execrable New York Times leading the charge. Later there was an attempt to bury this mass slaughter as “unfortunate but necessary and a good idea in the long run.”

It was only years or even decades later that we learned the truth about the fake coup and the mass slaughter. The Left was devastated in Indonesia and has remained in a meager state to this day. Obviously people in Indonesia have gotten the message about what happens to Leftists, which is always the general message of anti-Communist slaughters.

Hence it follows that once White people get it in their heads that “the Blacks are trying to kill us,” we can set ourselves up for some serious persecutions of Blacks based on that narrative. I doubt if we will start massacring Blacks, but “the Blacks are trying to rape and kill Whites” was always the excuse for lynchings and Jim Crow.

It’s an ugly narrative, and it’s a lie.

I could write articles about this sort of thing too, you know. I see articles all the time about Black people acting terrible, killing each other, killing White people, you name it. 98% of the time, I choose not to write about it. Why write about it? Yes, yes, we know Black people commit tons of crime, including violent crime. Yes, we know Black men have a high homicide rate.

Yes, we know that Black men kill many White people – but they kill far more Black people, and by and large, they prey mostly on their own kind.

Looking at the larger picture, Black criminals simply prey on other humans. They rob, rape and kill Hispanics, Asians, Whites and Blacks. They attack everyone. They are not real particular.

And the evidence shows that if anything, they by far preferentially select their own kind for violence, and they preferentially select against White victims. So if anything, Blacks prefer to prey on their own kind and it looks like Blacks actively avoid preying on Whites. If that’s the reality, then it’s quite a poisonous stew to cook up to sell the lie that Blacks preferentially attack Whites. “They’re coming to kill us! The Blacks are trying to kill us White people!” It’s not only a lie, but it’s a very dangerous lie, a mental poison with grave effects.

Just to see what sort of vibes Flaherty is churning up, look at the commenters. Looks like Niggermania, Chimpout, American Renaissance and Stormfront. There are all sorts of very vicious and ugly remarks against Black people as a race on there. So even if Flaherty really is a non-racist as he insists, look at all the wild racism that his irresponsible (or worse) videos and articles sprout. He’s fertilizing the land with poison, watching the weeds he watered grow and take over the land and choke out all the good and  decent crops, all the while protesting that he had nothing to do with it, he was just some innocent farmer trying to grow crops. Yeah. Crops of weeds.

Whenever I see that language, I think, “This person is promoting hatred against Greg, Tulio, and Alpha.” I think that’s unacceptable. None of these Black people do much of anything wrong. They live like good, law abiding citizens, and in short, they are good people. Selling hate propaganda against good people just because they are Black is wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are promoting a very dangerous lie.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Racial Pride Yes, Racial Chauvinism and Hatred No

Claudius: Holy crap Robert! I never thought I’d see you cheer a gun-totin’ white boy.

LOL. Well in the previous article you will note that I hate:

  1. SJW’s worst of all
  2. then ghetto Blacks (nor Black people, dammit),
  3. then cops, and
  4. last Republicans like this kid.

It’s all a matter of who I hate less. I hate guys like Kyle way, way less than I hate SJW’s, White or Wigger or not. As a matter of fact, I don’t hate Kyle at all. Normally I would dislike him, but I am choosing to ignore his politics. I don’t hate Claudius for his politics either.

I realized a long time ago that if I take a deep, long look at most of my family members and friends, there was at least one thing about them that was perfectly horrible and was justifiably utterly hate-able. So if you are going to associate with other humans at all, you have to give them some slack. Realize that there are a few things you detest about them, be ok with that, and in general, choose to ignore it and focus on their good sides. Most of us are not our worst day. Far from it.

Anyway, Claudius is awful damned open-minded for a rightwinger!

Isn’t that pathetic?

The Right is now the erudite, open-minded, tolerant, and peaceful people, and the Left is the ignorant, closed-minded, intolerant aggressive fucks. Exactly the opposite of the way it’s been most of my life. And yes, it is like the Cultural Left resembles the old rightwingers back in the day. I have a feeling that they have more in common with those old rightwing dinosaurs than we want to admit.

Just shows you how insane the Cultural Left is getting that I am actually pro-cop for the first time in decades and I am even supporting a Goddamned Trump supporter for blowing away two of my comrades.

Me? I hate cops! And here I am on the cop subs, cop forums and cop videos, cheering them on all the way.

And for the first time in my life, I feel a sense of camaraderie, empathy, and shared humanity with police officers. I still basically don’t like them deep down inside, but I also like them now, as they trump others on the hate scale, so nowadays I’m mostly thinking about how I like them, and I’m not in touch with the part of me that hates them much (it’s buried). You follow? I actually feel good that I have expanded my humanism a bit.

I’ve always said that one of your goals in life is to hate as few people as possible while also realizing that countless people deserve to be hated. I hate way too many people as it is. Any chance I can get to cross some people off my hate list makes me feel a bit better inside.

I’m not a racist all (by any sane standards), and as sane people like Polar Bear note, I actually have a soft spot (bend over backwards to be nice to when I probably shouldn’t) for Blacks. That’s just my old guilty liberal conscience. I don’t think true Lefties or liberals can never go very racist. They can go a bit racist, but then they run into the brick wall of their liberalism, and their liberalism just stops them from going further. Liberalism makes you softhearted and hostility towards real racism is rather baked into our souls.

More importantly, though I reject White Supremacism, White nationalism and the ethnostate and all of that extreme, excessive, obnoxious racism that goes along with it, I still very much love my people. Rather than being pro-White, I suppose I am anti-anti-White. I’m against the anti-Whites.

I like being White. I love my great White people. I love White culture, White music, White architecture, and White chicks. Whiteness is baked into top to bottom, and I’m all right with that. One wants to reject the conformity and sanctimoniousness of white picket fence White culture, but when you see the degenerated (as in a general decline in most important things) other cultures, I’ll take my White culture, warts and all. Life often isn’t so much about what’s good but more about what’s not as bad as the alternative things.

I was born a White boy and will die a White man, and I am perfectly ok with and even proud of those facts.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Lindsay Hatred Scale, Most to Least – SJWs > Ghetto Blacks > Cops

I live with a partisan Centrist Democrat who hates cops with a passion.

He’s also not fond of Blacks period and ghetto Blacks in particular, whom he refers to as niggers. I’m not kidding. That word is not as rare among Whites as you are thinking.

Hell, I might even use it myself in the privacy of my own home, right? But then if I did it (apologies to OJ), I’d be careful to only use to describe ghetto Blacks who in my opinion act horrible. I wouldn’t use it for any other Blacks, and I might get mad if someone did. I wouldn’t even call Jacob Blake’s father, a Black activist, that word. Nor Al Sharpton. Nor Shaun King. Hell, not even Minister Farrakhan. A race hustler is one thing, but even they have some dignity about them despite their unfortunate politics.

Anyway, I’ve been teasing him lately. “You hate cops worse than you hate ghetto Blacks! Ha ha!” He doesn’t say much to that except he keeps supporting the Blacks against the cops. But then he just did seven weeks in a particular circle of Hell called The Local Jail, where he was beaten badly for no good reason several times. I told you there’s a need for police reform, not to mention criminal justice reform period.

As for me, I’ve always thought I was the worst cop-hater around. Imagine how appalled I am to find myself supporting the police in every one of these recent incidents. And imagine how I fell out of my chair when I realized that 54% of the country now hates cops even more than I do! I’m now a goddamned cop sympathizer. I hang out on their subreddits. I read their forums. I watch their videos. Pathetic!

That’s because if there’s one thing I hate worse than cops, it’s SJW’s! I hate them a lot more than cops. It’s personal with me and them. Look how many sites they got me thrown off of. I lost 5,000 articles due to them. There are SJW’s out there who have stated that they are dedicated to destroying my reputation. Conservatives, on the other hand, while I don’t agree with them at all, are quite nice to me. That’s appalling too. The conservatives are now the nice polite guys with mostly lousy politics and the Left are the deranged, aggro, violent nutcases with the mostly good politics.

Now it’s between cops and ghetto Blacks. Well, I must say that I hate ghetto Blacks worse than I hate cops. And I hate cops pretty bad, so that’s saying something. Thing is, I’ve had a lot of dealings with these folks. I taught them in school for years. I’ve dated their women, much to my dismay. If you are taking notes, I’ll point out that every ghetto Black woman I have significantly dealt with has stolen money from me. Sometimes a bit, like $5-25. Other times more, like $70. As far as I am concerned, ghetto Black females are nothing but a race of thieves. Thieving whores, actually, except most of the time they just steal and don’t even fuck. Because the way they steal is time-tested.

Dangle the sex -> Get the money -> Disappear.

Alpha has told me that the women who do this have an extreme hatred of men and are frankly the worst specimens of the female gender. This is as low as a woman gets. I’ll also point out that every one of these Black women had elevated levels of psychopathy, in my opinion. Only one was a true psychopath, and boy was she a handful! The rest were not psychopaths but they had elevated psychopathy levels above White women.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Comparing Psychopathy Levels in Blacks and Whites

Comparing Psychopathy Levels in Blacks and Whites

Let’s compare White women to Black women, not for any particular reason except that we could have picked men or women and arbitrarily I chose women.

Now first of all, White women act dramatically better than White men and Black women act remarkably better than Black men. But that’s partly because psychopathy manifests in different ways among the sexes. In women, psychopathy manifests as Mata Hari, the femme fatale, a scheming, thieving whore. She’ll drain your pocketbook the moment you turn your back on her, but she won’t physically hurt you.

Now in men it’s so much worse. First of all, although theft is the one crime that women specialize in  more than any other (leaving prostitution aside), even in thievery, men commit more theft offenses than women. But the levels are only 2-1 and for many other offenses, it’s 9-1 or 19-1.

Not only do psychopathic man thieve even more than psychopathic women, but they commit all other crimes, particularly violent crimes, at a very high level. A psychopathic women will leave you broke and wondering what hit you. A psychopathic man will leave you injured and dazed and w0ndering what hit you, worse, in a hospital or with permanent injuries, and worse than that, in a grave.

I’d rather dealing with thieving whores than be dead, I don’t know about you guys.

Psychopathy Levels between White and Black Women

If an average White woman is a 5 on the PCL (Psychopathy Check List) scale (20 being the threshhold for psychopathy), I’d say the average ghetto Black female is a 10-15, or 2-3X as psychopathic as a White woman. Now these women are not psychopaths at all. They’re within the norms, so they’re non-psychopaths. However, psychopathy, like so many measurements, is a continuum ranging from 0-40. I believe Ted Bundy scored a perfect 40 on the PCL.

In other words, we’re all a bit psychopathic. And that’s fine. Some of us are probably not psychopathic enough, I imagine. I’m probably too low in psychopathy and I assume that’s why people keep trying to walk over me like a rug my whole life. At some excessive point, pacifism is a flaw.

Maybe it keeps us alive. But like so many things, a little bit may be harmless or even good but too much is a disaster.

Now the rest of the Blacks, let’s say half if ghetto Blacks are 50%, who I would call middle class Blacks, probably have fairly normal psychopathy levels probably around those of White women.

Perhaps overall they are mildly elevated, a 7 or an 8 to make the scales even out, as Black women are twice as psychopathic as White women, and the ghetto types are ~13, so the middle class ones have to be ~7 to get to 10. All of these figures are made up, mere placeholders so to speak, but the differentials are the same.

I would like to point out that I do not have a lot of evidence that middle class Blacks have even a slightly elevated psychopathy level, as they seem to act about like White people as far as I can tell. The middle class Blacks aren’t the problem! They might as well be White people! The problem is the ghetto Blacks, and boy are they a problem.

People often talk about how outraged many Whites are by the behavior of far too many Black people. From what I can tell a lot of this outrage probably stems from elevated psychopathy levels, particularly among ghetto Blacks. Even if most are not psychopaths, elevated levels within the norm as readily apparent in life. We think a lot of these people’s behavior is low-down and immoral at core. That’s the main complaint. The rest is just side dressing.

These folks do things on a quotidian basis that would quickly get you shouted down, then threatened, then punched, then evicted from most White communities. And here are ghetto Blacks, acting the exact same way that makes you persona non grata in our towns, traipsing along as if nothing is the matter, without a care in the world, and nary a trace of guilt. And yeah, the feeling that arouses in me, a White man, is simply outrage, for lack of a better word.

It’s so audacious, that someone would even think of acting that way. At the very least, if one acted so terribly, they should feel bad about it. I’ll give one at least a bit of respect just for having that hint of circumspection and moral reflection. But to act that way and not feel even 1% bad is something I cannot even comprehend.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin after Another Police Shooting of a Black Man

The latest police shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake, age 29, occurred yesterday at 5 PM in Kenosha, Wisconsin. He is still alive, but he was shot seven times in the back. Of course, Blake was basically ghetto, a thug and career criminal.

Jacob Blake in happier times with his three sons. By three different women, right? He looks halfway decent in this picture.

The vast majority of these young Blacks getting shot, often fatally, by police are not good people at all to say the least. What sort of people have regular run-in’s with the police. Not fine  upstanding citizens. They’re ghetto thugs and thugettes. They’re shitty people. Now, I’m not saying shitty people should be shot. You may well be a few million young Black men who are pretty damn lousy people. But I don’t support killing any of them. Even the ones in prison for terrible crimes. I just don’t believe in executing people no matter how awful they are, sorry.

But don’t fool yourself that most any of these people are any good. Most are real lousy people, to say the least.

Blake, who looks horribly ghetto, has a criminal record. Two years ago, he pulled a gun on people in a bar. When police arrived, he refused to cooperate with officers and had to be taken down by a police dog. Seems like he had a death wish, conscious or unconscious. This almost looks like a suicide by cop.

He had warrants out for his arrest for domestic violence and sexual assault.

Click to enlarge. I don’t like the way he looks in this picture at all. He’s ghetto as all get out. An awful lot of young Black men who look like this are not ok. And I might add that almost all of them are gang-involved. That’s straight up gang attire. Whether he’s a member of an associate is not so important.

Police officers are sent to an address with a report of a domestic disturbance. There is a fight going on there  between several ghetto Black women. Blake indeed does break up the fight.

There is a video of the shooting available.

As the video opens, there is enough of a commotion for someone to start filming. Police already have their guns out as the video opens, which never happens unless something very serious is going on.

A struggle is going on on the other side of the car, probably because he’s resisting arrest like almost all these guys are, which is pretty much why they get shot in the first place. He’s down on the ground. One cop punches him in the ribs and another cop tazes him to get him under control. But a Tazer only knocks you out for five seconds. Blake gets up and all three cops jump backwards and pull out their weapons. He’s apparently armed himself with something, apparently a knife.

The video on this page shows that Blake was involved in a huge fight with police before he gets free of them, whips out a knife, and starts to walk away.

He gets up after being tazed and walks along the opposite side of the car.

An object appears in Blake’s left hand. Turns out it’s a knife, apparently a karambit knife with a curved blade. This is an Indonesian silat knife.

An Indonesian karambit knife. Jacob Blake had one of these weapons in his hand when he was shot.

He turns in front of the car, the police looking very alarmed and still yelling for him to drop the object. It sounds like they are yelling, “Drop the gun!” but they could be yelling, “Drop the knife!”You can still see the knife in his hand.

Photo shows Jacob Blake had a Karambit curved knife in his hand as he walked away from police. Click to enlarge.

He turns and starts moving down the near side of the car heading for the driver’s seat. The police are right behind him, yelling. He opens the car door and starts to get in. Police are pulling on his shirt to try to pull him out of the car. He seems to bend down into the car and appears to be reaching for something behind the driver’s seat under the seat. Suddenly the police start shooting. Seven shots are fired. Correct, into his back.

However, there is now a rumor that when Blake was fighting with police, he said he was going to get a gun out of his car. Then he walks over to the car, opens the door, and appears to reach down behind and under the front seat. Guess what? This is exactly where he keeps his gun. In that very car too. We know this because in a previous arrest, his car was searched and his gun was found in this precise place. That’s an excellent reason to shoot him right there, gun or no gun, it doesn’t matter.

Click to enlarge. Blake appears to be reaching down, possibly behind and under the front seat. This is where he kept his gun in this same car in a previous arrest.

This combined with the previous incident shows strong tendencies towards suicide by cop. Whether these young Black men are actually suicidal or are just so angry that they don’t care, I’m not sure. At a certain point, you’re so furious that you don’t care if you live or die. It’s not suicidality. It’s like being in a war. Instead of being suicidal, I think a lot of these young Black men are blinded by rage and consciously or not wish to go down fighting. Like a lot of soldiers in wartime.

A very ghetto Black woman shows up and starts screaming hysterically. The video ends. Blake’s three children are sitting in the car and witness their father getting shot. Not a very good experience for them.

From the looks of it, Blake was resisting arrest, like almost all of these idiots.

Quite honestly, if Blake has that knife in his hand, and he won’t drop it, police have a right to shoot him right there, sorry. I don’t see why police have to wait until the suspect actually tries to stab them with the knife before they start shooting. He could have easily stabbed that cop pulling on his shirt. And that cop could have died. Got a knife in your hand and won’t drop it, get shot. Furthermore, by his own admission, he appears to be reaching for a gun in his car.

Large protests follow. The crowds are mostly mixed people with BLM signs. Interestingly, the crowds are half-White and half-Black.

Riots follow in the night. The rioters seem to be more Black than the very mixed protestors, but there are some White rioters too. It’s hard to tell because it’s so dark. There is a video of people smashing up a storefront with bricks and all of these rioters were Black. People with guns are leading the mobs. A man with a gun shoots up a police car. Trash trucks are set on fire. An entire city block is in flames. A parking lot full of cars goes up in flames. A police officer is hit in the head with a brick, a potentially deadly weapon, and goes down.

In other words, much of the usual mayhem ensues. The governor of Wisconsin issues a provocative statement attacking police and sympathizing with the rioters. Very irresponsible.

It is now daylight. The riots went on through the night. It is now calm and there are calls to come clean up the damage.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Myth of White Racial Loyalty in the Americas (Or Probably Anywhere for That Matter)

Commenter: Like I said, those are exceptions. White men still largely go after White women even if given the choice between White and other races. The White guys who go after Asian girls, for example, are basically the ones that either can’t get a White woman, or they want a traditional and more loyal partner, as White women are a bunch of egotistical, feminist, unfaithful whores these days.

In all of the New World, there was massive interbreeding between the Whites who invaded and conquered the continent and the Indians still there. Interbreeding was massive all over the continent with the exception of Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay. White men were quite willing to breed with Indian women and vice versa. No problem at all.

An early visitor to Brazil found a White man with 13 Indian brides. Such sights were not uncommon. In fact, Whites had bred so deeply into Brazil’s population that a project called Blanqamiento or Whitening was initiated to bring a lot of Whites over to make Brazil White. It didn’t work very well. Your average Brazilian is 54% White, but the rest is mixed with Black and Indian. Pure Whites are ~20%. There were vast numbers of Black slaves in Brazil. They are almost gone now as only 6% of Brazilians are Black. The rest all bred in, mostly to White men.

Guyana is hugely mixed. Your average person is a mulatto, half-White and half Black.

Suriname is very similar.

All of the Caribbean is mostly Black due to the slave trade. However, there is White admixture.

The White invaders of Jamaica are nearly gone and Jamaican Blacks are 9% White.

Similar things have occurred elsewhere.

In the Dominican Republic, 20% are Whites, but the Whites have some Black admixture. The rest are mulattos, Black-White mixes.

The Bahamas is 12% White and the original Whites are almost gone.

On some islands there is nothing left of the Whites, but some people called redbones, a Black word for a light-skinned Black.

There are almost no Whites on Haiti, however there are a tiny few, mostly Arabs, and they form part of the elite. Of course the Whites were massacred. However, a mulatto elite with substantial White admixture has traditionally ruled the place.

Cuba had many Whites and still does. However, there are also many Blacks and a vast number of mulattos. The Cuban genome is 37% Black. This was a society that went straight from slavery to Jim Crow, and look at how Whitened the Blacks become anyway.

There are reports of vanishing Blacks all over the continent. There were quite a few Blacks in Mexico at Liberation, especially on the East Coast. 200 years later, there are almost none. The Black population disappeared. What happened was that they bred into the White and mestizo population such that most Mexicans have 3-5% Black in them now.

There were many Blacks in Argentina in the late 1800’s. They seem to have vanished. What happened was they were bred out, and now the average Argentine has 3% Black in them. And the average Argentine White is 18% Indian, so they are actually mestizos.

Chile is similar. Pure Whites are not common. The upper class is Whites who are 20% Indian. The middle and lower classes are mestizos who are 40% Indian.

Peru has a tiny White population and a huge mestizo population.

Upon Liberation, Mexico was 40% White. 200 years later, it is 11% White. There has been almost no net non-White immigration. The Whites just gradually bred into the Indians and the mestizos, mostly the latter. Even today Whites try to preserve their White ancestry, but White Mexican men keep marrying mestizos, especially light-skinned mestizos. White women have been much more loyal to their race than men in the US and Latin America.

El Salvador was 100% Indian. Now it is 2% Indian and almost all the rest are mestizos.

Guatemala is 2% White with a huge mestizo population.

Ecuador is 2% White with a huge mestizo population.

In Venezuela and Colombia, Whites are only 20-25%. All the rest are mixed, mostly White, Indian, and Black.

Nicaragua is ~5% White. Most of the rest are mestizos.

Honduras has few Whites and almost everyone is a mestizo.

Panama is heavily mixed with White, Black and Indian.

In the US, almost all Blacks were pure when imported. Now your average Black American is 25% White. Pure Blacks are nearly nonexistent. A team went out to study a group of rural Black loggers in Alabama because they were only 5% White, and this is so unusual. If you can trace your White ancestry back to Colonial America, you may well have Indian in you. If you go back to 1600’s America as I do, the chance is even greater. The American White genome is even 3% Black overall. Not sure of how much Indian we have in us.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Even Ghetto Blacks Are Not Doomed to Uniformly Bad Behavior

Polar Bear: Blacks on the other hand will steal your cheap plastic lawn chair. Blacks are always up to no good on my block.

I have a feeling this is more universal than we think. I was talking to a Brazilian woman I knew well. I told her,

“You don’t want to be racist against Blacks, but it’s hard.”

Meaning it’s hard for obvious reasons. She immediately commiserated and said,

Yes, it’s hard. Here in Brazil, we have a saying about Blacks. “If they don’t steal from you when they’re coming, they steal from you when they’re going.” (obviously in Portuguese).

In other words, “If they don’t steal from you when they come in, they steal from you when they leave.”

They don’t really act all that bad around here in my city except that they are ghetto as Hell. I made friends with one older Black man though. He hated Whites but I was able to get through to him. Later he saw me with a hot 23 year old part-Black woman, so now he probably likes me even more.

We just don’t have many Blacks in this town, period. Hence they cause few problems, and they tend to keep their heads down because they don’t have any numbers, which is what they ought to do anyway. When you only have a small % of Blacks in a city, they tend to act pretty good, mostly because they simply don’t have any numbers. They still cause problems. Blacks like that always cause problems. But they don’t cause mayhem like they do when they have larger numbers, and the difference between problems and mayhem is all the difference in the world.

Further, they are surrounded by Whites and Hispanics who almost always act better than they do. To their credit, these typically ghetto Blacks imitate the Whites and Hispanics around them and act a lot better.

A lot of them still act like shit but still act a lot less shitty than they ordinarily would. They’re still antisocial but they are antisocial in petty, neighborly ways and not in serious criminal ways. Like always asking to borrow money and then you never see the money again. They see you with an expensive object and they “request” that you give it to them. Just typical ghetto nig shit, but they won’t menace you if you don’t fork over your property, and you can always quit loaning them money.

All the young women in their 20’s have at least one kid, obviously with no man in sight. However, these basically ghetto women are quite well behaved.

Also around here the better behaved Blacks dislike the more ghetto ones like I just described. So there are varying degrees of morality even among a hardcore Black population.

In addition, the Whites and Hispanics simply will not put up with any shit at all from these ghetto Blacks. They call these Blacks on their tiniest antisocial bullshit, so that tends to nip the usually mandatory escalation in the bud. I have often thought that if these ghetto Blacks around here were living in a Black ghetto, they would act a lot worse.

It’s so obvious to me that even ghetto Blacks are not doomed to any particular behavior level. It’s also painfully clear to me that their own kind not only serve as horrific role models but also don’t call these Blacks on much of any of their antisocial bullshit. They don’t call them on the little stuff, and they probably don’t call them on the bigger stuff.

Humans aren’t stupid. They’ll get away with just about whatever the Hell you let them get away with. White people act quite good, but we aren’t angels, and every White community has its scumfucks. We are only human after all. Living in White communities my whole life, I was told and learned the hard way that (White) people will get away with just about whatever you let them get away with. So this isn’t a ghetto Black thing. It’s a human thing.

The behavior of even ghetto Blacks can be markedly improved.

First of all, they need to be a minority, preferably under 25%. 25% Black seems to be a tipping point in many cities, after which things start to go seriously to Hell in a handbasket. Below 25% Black, you can look at the statistics of various pathologies, and they don’t rise that much from 5 – 10 – 15 – 20% Black. The city remains more or less livable.

But somewhere between 20-30%, most cities tip over. What follows is probably White flight, usually slow rather than fast, and worse than that is that the decently behaved Blacks (of which there are many – many millions!) start taking off too. Well-behaved Blacks aren’t stupid. They’re not going to sit around in some ghettoizing shithole due to racial solidarity. Sanity and safety trumps racial consciousness any day of the week.

This does not apply to wealthy Black areas like Ladera Heights in Los Angeles, and it probably doesn’t apply to small Black towns in the South where a remarkably decent authentic Black culture is often present.

Second of all, the small population of Blacks needs to be a part of a better behaved larger population, preferably White, Hispanic, or Asian. Ghetto Blacks act remarkably better even in majority-Hispanic cities because Hispanic pathologies are much exaggerated and they act better than most people think.

Third, the larger population needs to call these ghetto Blacks on their antisocial shit, starting with the most petty neighborly BS. Just shut it down before it even starts. Either due to this or due to the general environment, the better behaved Blacks start shutting down the bad actors too. People, even supposedly irredeemable ghetto Blacks, do respond to harsh correction at the societal level.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Face It: The Latest Riots are Multiracial Leftwing Antiracist Riots

Alpha Unit: I am responding to this narrative that all this destruction and violence is a “Black” thing. That’s not the whole story.

I would agree with you that the riots are not all a Black thing. Head on over to American Renaissance and see how these are being portrayed as Black riots. Well, there are Black riots in this country, but these don’t really qualify. In some cities, in these riots it is mostly Blacks rioting. Those are cities in the South like Atlanta, Louisville, Birmingham, and some other places that elude me at the moment. I believe there were Whites in the crowd in Atlanta though.

In general, the rioters were a mix of young Black, Hispanic, and White men, mostly antisocial and living on the edge of society, most without decent or any jobs or much to lose. I saw many young men rioting right alongside the Blacks. The Whites looked like skate punk and Antifa types. A lot of Whites were holding up BLM signs and chanting BLM slogans.

In LA, most of the rioters tended to be Hispanics.

In Las Vegas, the crowd was very mixed, mostly Hispanics with some Whites, even including White women, with a few Blacks in the mix too. The white rioters seemed to have more of the fancier materials you need to start a riot.

In Minneapolis, many of those smashing and setting things on fire were young White men, often skate punk types. In some cases, they worked right alongside inner city type Blacks. However, I did see an interview with a Minneapolis Black gang member who said that all of the gangs in the city (mostly Black) were working together in these riots to cause mayhem even though a lot of them were enemies normally.  So there is also a criminal gang element, but that shouldn’t be surprising.

The riots seem quite multiracial in New York, but it was hard to get a breakdown. There were a lot of Blacks but also some Whites.

There were many Whites in the Washington DC riots but also a lot of Blacks of course.

Rioters in Seattle and Portland tended to be young antifa type Whites.

Chicago seemed to have a lot of Blacks, but there were also Whites mixed in.

The truth is that these for the most part are multiracial riots. Yes, many rioters are Black, but there are quite a few young White and Hispanic men in the mix.

I will say one thing. It seems like most of the looting is being done by Blacks. I did see a few Whites looting in Minneapolis and New York. Hispanics are known to loot but I’m not aware of how many of them did. In the Rodney King riots, the looters were heavily Black and Hispanics. However, when they moved up to Hollywood, a lot of more or less regular young White men got in on, targeting high end items.

I was happy to see the stores of the rich looted and smashed up though. That’s who they should be targeting.

Looting does tend to be a Black thing. Hispanics don’t seem to loot as much, and it seems like a lot of Whites, even White rioters, are averse to looting. A White rioter will smash stuff up, set a building on fire but then refuse to loot other buildings. Not sure why that is, but I think Antifa doesn’t like looting. Plus a lot of Whites are afraid to steal or perhaps they even consider it morally wrong.

Alpha Unit: And leftwing people are not delusional for thinking there are rightwing people out there seeking to capitalize on these protests.

Correct, but I am seeing little evidence of this.

Three Bugaloo Boys went to a demonstration and tried to turn it violent, but the crowd did not buy it. Further, the Bugaloos are a mixed bag. Yes most are rightwingers, often racist ones. However, there are other Bugaloos who are on the left and a number of them are antiracists. So the Bugaloos are just a group of “tear it down” folks who are insurrectionists against the government for a variety of reasons – right, left, racist and antiracist. The only thing that unites them is the desire to smash it up and take down the state.

I am watching leftwing subs on Reddit, and all they ever say about these riots is that it’s White Nationalist racists and undercover police instigators who are setting off the  riots or even doing most of the damage. I went to the page of one liberal, and he said all the destruction was being done by White nationalists and undercover police instigators. He also said Russia was behind the riots.

Black people don’t want to think it’s their people rioting. That’s a typical human Dindu reaction. They are correct, the Black rioters are having a significant  amount of White and Hispanic help. That’s the better response. Pawning it off on cops and rightwing racists ain’t gonna cut it.

Leftwingers and antiracists object to the notion that these are leftwing antiracist riots. Once again this is the typical human Dindu reaction. Dindu reactions tend to be more of a human response than a Black cope. People don’t like to take responsibility when their group does bad things, so they blame it all on outsiders or better yet, their enemies.

Rightwingers are notorious for this but as we can see, leftwingers and antiracists are not immune to it either. The defenses are Denial and Projection. “Blaming other people” isn’t just something pathological people do. Most people go through life blaming other people in some way or other. I don’t object to blaming other people, but I think the less you do it, the better.

But that’s exactly what they are – these are indeed leftwing antiracist riots. And antifa-type and BLM (neither of which are organizations) elements do appear significant. The young Whites may be apolitical, or if they vote at all, they vote Bernie. The Blacks and Hispanics just vote straight Democratic if they even vote at all. I think a lot of these rioters are apolitical in the sense that they are outside of organized politics and might not even vote.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Leftwing Dindus: Who’s Behind the Riots?

Alpha Unit: LAS VEGAS (AP) — Three Nevada men with ties to a loose movement of right-wing extremists advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government have been arrested on terrorism-related charges in what authorities say was a conspiracy to spark violence during recent protests in Las Vegas.

Federal prosecutors say the three white men with U.S. military experience are accused of conspiring to carry out a plan that began in April in conjunction with protests to reopen businesses closed because of the coronavirus.

More recently, they sought to capitalize on protests over the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis after a white officer pressed his knee into his neck for several minutes even after he stopped moving and pleading for air, prosecutors said.

The three men were arrested Saturday on the way to a protest in downtown Las Vegas after filling gas cans at a parking lot and making Molotov cocktails in glass bottles, according to a copy of the criminal complaint obtained by The Associated Press.

Make of this what you will.

So, did they spark any violence? No. What is the name of this group? Boogaloo Boys?

The vast majority of the people I see smashing stuff up, setting things on fire, and looting are young people. Many of them are young Black men who don’t exactly look like fine upstanding citizens. In the West many of the rioters are young Hispanic man who don’t exactly look like model citizens either. In all of these riots, and most particularly in Minneapolis, the smashers and burners were young White men who look something like antifa types or skate punks. Antifa has indeed had presence in these riots. Look at all the antifa graffiti.

The vast majority or rioters are young lumpen Black, Hispanic and White men. They live on the fringes of society and are estranged from mainstream culture. Many are anti-society. Most don’t seem to have much if any money. Many do not appear to be married or have children.

If these rioters vote at all, they may vote Bernie. The Blacks and Hispanics will either vote Bernie or simply Democratic if they even vote at all. These are leftwing riots all the way. Not even liberal riots. Leftwing riots, as in to the left of liberal Democrats. No party is behind this. Almost all Democratic Party politicians are condemning the violence. There are no organizations called antifa and Black Lives Matter.

Of course people on the left do not wish to believe that these are leftwing riots. Left-wingers, like everyone else, are Dindus. I suppose Blacks also wish to deflect the blame, and Blacks are the original Dindus. Leftwing Dindus are saying that all the rioting is being caused by far right racist White nationalists and undercover police instigators. This is simply the natural human tendency to deny and deflect blame whenever members of your group do something unsavory.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Genocide? What White Genocide?

My Mom laughs about these people. I mention Nordicists to her and she shrugs her shoulders, chuckles as if talking about a silly person, and asks:

Why don’t they just move to Iceland…or Idaho?

My sister hears it, shakes her head and starts giggling. I tell my Mom about White Genocide theories, and she just chuckles, shrugs her shoulders, and says:

Oh well, looking around at this town, I’d say White people are going to be around a pretty long time.

She’s right. Last time I went to an event in her town (I think Halloween dinner event), there must have been 75 people there, and I didn’t see one non-White. Lots of red hair too! Gingers are hardly going extinct despite WN handwringing, and with all this hair dye nowadays, who cares about hair color anyway?

I was looking around at that Halloween dinner crowd and thinking:

White genocide? LOL I don’t think so. Not yet anyway.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Of Course I’m Not a Racist

Polar Bear: I consider Robert antiracist with a soft spot for US Blacks.

Of course I am! I am a pretty mild anti (old school) but I am still an anti at my core (MLK style). How come these White Nationalist types are the only ones who get me right? They all say exactly this. All of the White nationalists say, “Hey look, man! You’re not one of us, ok? You’re an anti.” They often add that I’m anti-White. Wouldn’t you think if I were one of them, they would just come right out and say it?

I tell modern SJW scum this, and they start twisting themselves around in all sorts of weird human pretzels trying to make sense. Typically they say that racism goes beyond the Mighty Whitey types and White nationalists. Ok, fine, but isn’t there a bit of a continuum when it comes to this sort of thing? The guy next door who muses, “Boy, Blacks sure commit a lot of crime, don’t they?” is the same as Richard Spencer and Stormfront.

“Of course,” SJW’s say, “It’s all the same.” But do you see how insane that is? Jews think like this too. People around the watercooler laughingly comment that Jews are loud, rude, and obnoxious. Half of them are Judeophiles, but every Judeophile I ever knew said precisely this about Jews. The Jew sees that and according to this insane Jewish lunatic, those Judeophiles standing around the watercooler are exactly the same as the maniacs who threw his ancestors in the fire.

And of course the WN view is true because this is how I see myself. I assume that I see myself in a proper light. I would hate to think that others understand me better than I understand myself. I’m much too self-aware for that.

Really racism is a continuum of 0-100 I think. 0 is absolutely nonracist or antiracist. 100 would be completely racist, at least towards some particular group.I am thinking that there are not a lot of 0’s out there, but there are obviously some.

According to SJW’s, we all have to be zero’s on the scale! But why? It’s human nature to be somewhere on a continuum when it comes to most anything. This isn’t a purity contest or is it? SJW’s demand that people be 100% good and 0% bad. In this way, SJW’s very much resemble fundamentalists Christians, Muslims, and Jews. And of course they’re party-pooper turd-in-the-punchbowl no-funners like all of those dour religious types too. SJW’s are Church Ladies.

On that 0-100, WN’s would be racist towards most other groups so they would be close to 100’s; Nordicists are racist towards nearly everyone on the planet so they would be even closer to 100’s.

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Libertarianism and the Alt Left: Prospects for an Alliance?

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: Peronismo definitely won’t fly in Libertarian circles. Argentina is used as a case study for a failed nationalized protectionist economy.

That’s probably not even true. They did great during the Peron years.

I think that the Trump years in general and this COVID-19 response in particular, both of which have been characterized by neoliberal or Libertarian policy and a Libertarian response to a crisis, respectively, has proven the abject failure of the neoliberal or Libertarian model. As if it had not been proven failed by the 2008 crash, which was caused wholly by this model.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: To unify all the nomadic tribes of the Alternative Steppe, three things are need. First, a rejection of central economic planning would have to be declared by right and left wingers. Second, constitutional or legislative limitations on the power of government to regulate. Essentially, castrate the FDA, FCC, FAA etc.* and legalize drugs

I absolutely will not go for either of those. Central planning is working great in China. Even South Korea, Japan, and Germany engage in central planning.

And we will never go along with gutting regulations. Alt Leftists are regulators. We are really Big Government types in a lot of ways.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: And third, a solution to the immigration problem.

There is no solution to this problem.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: The social-economic model, even if never explicitly stated as such, would be capitalism for corporations, socialism for individuals, and tyranny at the border, which is the inverse of what we have now. Warren Buffett agrees.

It’s the capitalism for corporations part that we are going to object to. That’s the whole problem right there.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: The Democrats will stay hopelessly in shambles for the next few elections until minority GDP and population both over take that of whites.

I wouldn’t count on that if I were you.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: Deregulation is hard for leftists to accept because of the strong tendency to falsely conflate wealth redistribution with government regulation.

It is in fact that only thing that redistributes income at all. Absent that you just have never-ending growth of inequality until you pretty much have feudalism. Neoliberalism (or Libertarian economics) has failed everywhere it’s been tried. It’s only success stories are when it’s mixed with socialism. Most of the world rejects neoliberal economics. The US is a holdout. There aren’t many others.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: I suggest aptitude AND loyalty testing for immigrants to keep the stupids or anti-westerns out.

That’s fine.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: No explicit racism, but it would effectively bring in only Christian Caucasians from Europe, Africa and the Middle-East, liberal East Asians and light-skinned Hispanics.

We would object to this part. Of course we want mostly high-quality immigrants, but they don’t have to be any particular race. High-quality immigrants of any race should be just fine.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: Currently, strong regulation of consumer goods & services exists because, ex post fact, individuals can’t afford to sue companies for the damages their products may have caused. As IQ’s, automation, access to on-line information, and personal income increase worldwide, people could rely less on byzantine jurisprudence.

I don’t understand any of this.

CLAVDIVS AMERICANVS: But as I see the tsunami of technology and globalization approaching to totally demolish the justification for our current system, I can’t help but take preparations for the utopia. We must agree on which anarchist utopia to usher in, lest our system turn into a Blade Runner dystopia.

The future will not be any type of anarchism. In fact the future will see a greater role for the state.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Complete Deterioration of Literary Criticism in the Last 40 Years

I like to read literary criticism sometimes because it’s some of the hardest stuff out there to understand, at least for me. Forget philosophy. Don’t even go there. Lit Crit is different. With Lit Crit it’s hard as hell to understand and it’s incredibly smart and dense, but you can pretty much understand most if not all of it, so it’s worth it. I call it giving my brain a workout, and to me it’s similar to going to the gym for your body.

I recently read a couple of Hemingway’s best short stories. Then I found and read two Lit Crit articles about them. Lit Crit is very useful this way. If you haven’t already read the work, I’m not quite sure how useful it is or how much you would get out it. But if you’ve read it, Crit is often great for explicating the work and explaining deeper meanings, themes, etc. hidden in the text.

One was in a journal called Journal of College Literature from 1980. It was remarkably down to earth for a Lit Crit journal, especially the issues around published around that time. So I started going through a few decades worth of the journal.

I noticed that the Lit Crit from ~40 years ago was much different and frankly much superior to the gobbledygook out nowadays. It then focused on individual books and was fairly straightforward, simply looking for explications of the events, characters, plots, and themes in the book.

As I moved forward a couple of decades, everything changed. Now it was all postmodernism. Lit Crit about individual works were less common. The crit became ridiculously politicized with SJW and PC Leftist slants towards everything. Now I am a Leftist myself (albeit a weird one) but for the life of me, I do not understand why we need to litter our Lit Crit with Leftist political theory.

In addition to Marxism, there was also inordinate focus on women (feminism, mostly a joke field called Women’s Studies), gays and lesbians (from the lens of a ridiculous and bizarre field called Queer Studies), Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other non-Whites (same thing- focus on non-fields like Black and Hispanic Studies), on and on.

Pretty much all they wrote about were these “oppressed minorities.” Cringey Queer Studies essays searched for and discovering non-existing homosexuality in perfectly straight stories (Did you know Moby Dick is a gay novel?) and secret homosexuality in completely straight authors (Did you know Shakespeare was gay?). It’s weird and stupid.

There was also a strange attempt to find some silly “woman angle” in novels where women were not particularly important to the story.
There was also a focus on older books written by women and minorities which are apparently good books merely because they were written by a minority or woman and not for any other reason.

Why Lit Crit has to be all about oppressed minorities is beyond me. Fine, some minorities are oppressed. We need a politics to address that. But why trash up Lit Crit with leftwing obsessions with minority groups? Last time I checked, straights, Whites, and men also existed. Can we maybe keep the politics out of our Crit and just talk about the books without turning everything into a political rally?

Another worse problem went along with this. The essays became dominated by postmodernism and were much harder to understand. There were references to philosophy scattered all through everything (particularly unintelligible Continentals like Sartre, Derrida, Lacan, Cixous, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Foucalt, Frankfurt School, DeLueze and Guattari).

That’s all fine and dandy but why can’t we keep unintelligible philosophers out of our Lit Crit? What do incomprehensible Frenchmen spouting nonsense have to do with the novels we read?

It is true that the essays became much more demanding, but there was also a lot of silly talk about things like the Body (?), the Male Gaze (!?), the Text, the Author, the Reader (Barthes), on and on with weird, silly postmodern concepts.

In addition, somehow they became strangely repetitive in that they obsessed over the same postmodernist tropes and views in essay after essay. After a while, it seemed like I was reading the same essay again and again and learning little about the actual books being discussed.
Finally, it became quite boring as a result of this repetition.

tl/dr: Lit Crit has completely deteriorated over the past 40 years. It’s now a swamp of barely comprehensible postmodernism and obsessions with women, gays and minorities. Leftist politics and incoherent Continental philosophers litter every essay, turning it from a brain workout into muddy slow trod up a mountain in the rain without boots or a poncho.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Alt Left Definition of Racism

Have you heard of the anonymous academic La Griffe du Lion?

http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/

His best is where he explains how low black IQ may have cost Al Gore Florida and the Presidency.

http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/elec2000.htm

First of all, he’s not anonymous. He’s been doxed already.

Yes I have heard of him and he’s absolutely horrible. He’s a sociology professor at some university. I hate tossing the word racist around promiscuously like SJW’s do, but let’s face it, some Whites are indeed racist against Black people,  and he’s definitely one of them.

I’m not talking about race realism, which is just reciting facts that Black people don’t want to hear. Race realism per se is not racism, but 99% of race realists are actual racists, so I see why people say race realism is racism. However there are a few that are not. That’s basically been the project at this site since forever: to create a progressive, non-racist race realist discourse. It goes beyond that but that’s a good starter.

Race realism with a tone of animus is racist. Race realism without animus is not racist at all. I define racism as animus and I also propose that as an Alt Left definition of racism. And La Griffe De Lion is racist in that sense. He has actual animus towards Blacks and it shows in his writing.

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Black People’s Reaction to a White Man Dating a Black Woman

Alpha Unit: People tend to be possessive of the men or the women of their group. It’s been observed across races.

I’ve seen complaints from both American and non-American Black people about interracial relationships.

I understand where this possessiveness comes from, but it’s possible to get over it. Let grown people date and marry whoever they want.

Yeah, when I dated Black women, I caught some serious shit from Black men. I remember once they glared at me and really hated the fact that I was with this Black chick. It honestly freaked me out pretty bad since they were so up front about it.

The attitude was a mixture of hostility and puzzlement or bafflement, like I was weird in some disturbing way, and they couldn’t understand me. Sort of like, “What the Hell are you doing, man?! WTF? You’re fucking weird, man! What’s your problem?” Or maybe, “The nerve of you!” Something like that.

I asked her about it and she said:

“They don’t like that.”

“You mean a White guy with a Black woman?”

“Yes, Black men don’t like it.”

“Why?”

“I don’t know. They just don’t. It’s just the way they are. They’re like that.”

“They think I’m stealing one of their women?”

“Maybe.”

On the other hand, I would be out with a Black chick and see young Black women, and they seemed to be giving the Black woman a thumbs-up. “You go, girl! Good job, snagged yourself a White man.” Almost like I was a prize. It was an odd reaction but it made me feel pretty good. I’m not sure if Black women see White men are prizes. Apparently some of them do.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: How Do Liberal Whites Talk about Blacks Behind Closed Doors?

Tamerlane: Curious about what Whites truly think about Blacks (and other races) behind closed doors…

…besides the usual:

1) Blacks are stupid (have low IQ’s)
2) Blacks have low emotional self-control
3) Blacks have a criminal disposition
4) Blacks are lazy (low conscientiousness)

That’s about it. You won’t hear much beyond that from liberal Whites anyway.

1. The low intelligence is not regarded with contempt but instead as a simple fact. My mother in particular has been fascinated by this subject and has been studying it for many years,  probably 50 years. She thinks there is something  to it and it’s genetic. She’s heard of Arthur Jensen and William Shockley.

Some will argue against the race-IQ facts out of ignorance. I had one guy like that. His response was,
“No way…” but he had a funny little smile on his face when he said it. Then I argued that IQ tests did indeed show that Blacks on average were less intelligent. He argued against it for a while but then he caved. He had the same odd little smile on his face, sort of a curious smile. Then he said, “Well, of course. Of course they’re not as smart.”

On the other hand, I had a very racist friend 35 years ago, and we were discussing this subject. He said, “You mean niggers ain’t got no brains, right?” and he chuckled. I said yeah. And he said, “Well, yeah, obviously, of course.”

2. The low self-control is not discussed. It’s a rather sophisticated subject and most folks are just not intellectual enough to take it on.

However, perhaps along those lines, I did tell my mother about the candy bar experiments in the Caribbean and the US South where the Black children could not seem to delay gratification whereas almost all the White children choose to delay their pleasure.

She nodded her head with a tired expression that was somewhat cynical and said, “Well, of course.” She has also noted that Blacks mature earlier than other races, and she thinks this is  genetic. She noted that Blacks mature earliest and are least intelligent, and Asians mature latest and are most intelligent. She acted like this was genetic. She had that same sort of tired, cynical tone when she said that.

3. They would not say that Blacks have a criminal disposition. Instead they would say that Blacks commit a lot of crime for whatever reason and this is the main rationale behind anti-Black racism. I will talk about anti-Black racism, and they will say in an exasperated tone, “It’s the crime!”

There was a guy where I live, a psychopath and a gang member, part Black and part Hispanic Cuban-American, a criminal who later ripped me off for a $175 knife. I told him about the Black-crime thing, and he acted surprised at first and disbelieving or maybe just shocked. Then he nodded his head gravely and said, “They’re savages.” And this guy was part Black!

I forget what I did, maybe nodded my head or something crappy like that. I don’t like to be disagreeable. I don’t agree that Black people are savages, but I like my conversations to go smoothly. Then he said, “Well no wonder. They come from Africa. They’re savages over there in Africa.” I probably nodded my head to this one too, and sadly it’s a lot more true than the previous statement.

But born criminals? Nope, people don’t really say that. Sometimes it is implied but not stated, though. I remember my mother telling me about friends of hers who adopted a Black boy, and as he grew into an adolescent, he became a complete psychopath.

She said her friends were the nicest people, and he probably had the best upbringing. In other words, environment had nothing to do with it. The implication was that he had a genetic tendency and that this tendency was heightened due to his race.

4.You don’t hear much about Blacks being lazy, and a lot of people will argue against it and say they sure worked hard as slaves, etc. That was my line forever and I would probably still whip it out just to be a liberal ha ha.

However, my 87 year old mother, a liberal Democrat, thinks there is something to it. Not that there aren’t hard-working Blacks.

And by the way, one of her best friends started dating a Black man from Mississippi in her 80’s. I met the guy and he’s the coolest dude you ever met. My Mom was 100% supportive of this relationship. And she probably would not have been earlier in life. So even in that generation, things are changing. Dramatically.

I have these conversations most often with liberal Whites, and they generally police their speech pretty well. All of this talk is a bit taboo, and it’s not talked about much because it seems like it makes them uncomfortable. It’s as if they’d rather not discuss it, like these are uncomfortable or unpleasant truths.

But beyond that, no. No liberal ever discusses Black appearance in a negative way. That’s considered to be very gross racist thinking.

I’m not sure if there are other legitimate criticisms you can make of Black people. I think most liberals would say that the four above are a handful, if not too much to stomach right there. The last thing they want to do is hear any more negative stuff about Black people. They don’t want these things to be true and they think the fewer arguments like this, the better.

Racist jokes about Blacks are also frowned upon.  They’re considered to be somewhat gross and disgusting, rather uncouth. Maybe a bit vicious too. It’s sort of, “Hey, we don’t talk like that around here.”

There is a hint of exasperation about these conversations at times, if not cynicism. At least in my Mom’s case.

With liberals like my sister or my late father, you could not even bring up any of this without them blowing up and starting a huge fight. My sister hates the race-IQ argument  and noticeably squirms in her seat if you bring it up.

My father especially hated the race-IQ question. It was false, he said, because if it were true, “that means there’s no hope (for Blacks)!” Well, perhaps that is so, but it certainly doesn’t make the statement false. As you can see, a truthful statement for my father meant something he wanted to be true. If he didn’t want it to be true, it was simply a falsehood. I honestly believe the  vast majority of people think exactly like this.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Liberals, Racism, and the Purpose of This Site

RL: “What sort of racist attitudes? Describe.”

Alpha Unit: Robert, you’ve written more than once about the kinds of things even liberal or Leftist Whites say and do in private around “chosen Whites.” You’ve even stated that most Whites are racist to some degree.

Hmm, that’s just race realism though. Not really racism if you ask me anyway.

Most Whites are racist? In the sense of having some negative attitudes towards Blacks, sure, of course. SJW Whites are not common.

But yes, I know liberals, or more properly Centrist Democrats, who get quite racist behind closed doors, like with me for instance. Calling Blacks niggers and all that.

I don’t say anything. I’m not that guy’s Mom or his preacher, and I hate narcs and cops and anything resembling them, so I’m not about to tell anyone to tone down their speech. On the other hand, I don’t like it. Promiscuously referring to all Blacks as niggers in conversation is just…I dunno…gross?  It’s sort of disgusting, like food that leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

Also, not chosen Whites, more like certain Whites. The ones who might be receptive to such heresies. Often the speech even behind closed doors is very well-policed, probably as it ought to be because if most White liberals said behind closed doors what they really think about other races, particularly Blacks, it probably wouldn’t be a pretty picture.

A lot of things are better left unsaid and a lot of speech is better off policed than let it all hang loose.

And there’s a lot of thoughts that are better left unspoken. I really don’t care what someone thinks of me. They can like me or hate me or anything in between. As long as they’re nice to my face, that’s all that matters. If they sweet-talk me to my face but then say, “God-damn that sonofabitch!” when I walk out the door, I’m not sure if I care about that too much, unless someone tells me about it, in which case, I won’t like it. For Chrissake, keep it to yourself, dammit!

Sometimes the talk behind closed doors even with those who police their speech can get overtly racist. Usually not me but others can get like that. Most people simply cannot critique another race without getting racist and shitty about it. Of course that is what we are trying to get away from here.

We engage in a lot of racial critique (of any and all races, really), and that critique includes the good as well as the bad, but we are trying to do it in as nonracist a way as possible.

Granted that’s pretty difficult, but that’s been the purpose of the site ever since I started way back with Liberal Race Realism, which was pretty much a flop and had to be abandoned. Beyond Highbrow – tell it like it is! But do so in as non-bigoted a way as possible, please. I mean there are ladies present, boys. Mind your manners please.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

White Suicidality and the Odd Specter of the Indian Hindu Nordicist, of All Things

We have yet another Indian Nordicist posting away in the comments section. With all due respect to the commenter, these guys crack me up. Why are all these light-skinned Indian wannabe Whites Nordicists for God’s sake? Remember the commenter Swedish Shit? Note that he chose Sweden. He lived in the UK but for a while there, he was lying and saying he was living in Sweden. Before that he had some name with words like Snow or White in it.

All of these Indian wannabe Whites are Nordicists. Hell, they are worse than Northern and Western Europeans themselves and their descendants here in North America (let’s call them WASPs for short though technically most are not).

Most Northern and Western European Whites in the US (I include myself here) gave up on Nordicism long ago. If you bring up some crap like “Italians aren’t White,” these Americans will dismiss you, saying, “Oh, that’s old-fashioned.”

Among the culturally liberal WASPs I grew up, Nordicism was extremely unpopular. The beach assimilated everyone. Pick up a surfboard, ride the waves, smoke joints, grow your hair long, fuck surfer chicks, and you’re “White” by default. Americans with Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Greek, Hispanic, or even Filipino ancestry were all pretty much assimilated into “Whites with some funny genetics.”

Because everyone simply acted White, no one cared about race and bringing it up was extremely taboo and majorly uncool. When all the groups act the  same, there’s no racism. Racism stems from difference, and different behaviors are prominent in that.

That’s why we Whites would rather hang with a middle class Black than a White wigger with his cap on backwards. The Black guy is basically “White” as far as we are concerned, and the  wigger is Black. Worse, he’s nothing but a nigger,  a White nigger, sure, but a nigger nonetheless!

A lot of the people I hang around would effectively evict him from the White race. We do this with some Whites, especially serious wiggers or scumbags.We simply inform them that they are no longer White and we start calling them niggers or making racist plays on words around  their names. As an example, there was a guy, a real scumbag who fell very low, named Meglar. That wasn’t his name, that was obviously just his nickname. Long story but anyway, moving on…

At one point, we informed him solemnly that he was no longer a member of the White race and he was now officially Black as far as we were concerned. We started making puns on his name, calling Nigler instead of Meglar. As with most White scumbags, criminals, drug addicts, and jailbirds, he was a major anti-Black racist, but not as bad as the WN kind.

So it’s a supreme insult to tell these working class White racists that they are no longer White and they are now Black; worse they are actual niggers. This with the knowledge that tens of millions of Blacks in the US are absolutely not niggers at all, and good for them.

I don’t even want to take a guess on the nigger population because I want to throw most Ghetto or really normative Black culture into that category, and I don’t like to call vast numbers of members of a race by racial slurs. It feels, you know, racist. And we liberals are viscerally uncomfortable with engaging in what we would call racist behavior. It’s a yuck factor.

After his eviction from our people, we’d tell him to move to Detroit to be around his own kind. And there’s some social race right there, exactly like the Brazilian kind.

We at the beach were practicing social race all the way back in the 1960’s. It’s not peculiar to South America, you know. Sure, there are a few Nordicists out there in my crowd, but people regard them as silly, weird, crazy, or awful. For instance, I have seen them tell Sicilians they are not White, and the Sicilian acted like he was going to punch the Nordicist’s face. A typical reaction with the crowd I hang with, and this was in an  all-White town.

Stormfronters and White Nationalist morons completely blew it by not giving up on Nordicism. White politics will never get anywhere unless you include the Meds and the Armenians, Georgians, Finns, Saami, Iranians, White Arabs, White Berbers, Turks, Albanians, certain people of the Stans and some Uighurs, a select few Afghans, Pakistanis and even Northern Indians, and yes, even Jews at the very least.

The notion that Jews are not White has always been a feint. Of course they are White. In fact, Jews are some of the Whitest Whites of all, as they have almost zero Black in them. Most European races absolutely have some Black in them. Germans have 1.5% for instance. With Portuguese, it’s up to 4-5% and with Sicilians, it is all the way to 5-7%.

WN’s never figured out that the more people you invite to the party, the better of a bash it is. They want to create a White state while hating most of the White people on Earth and calling them non-Whites. Good luck with that!

Sure, SJW Whites are suicidal, that’s obvious. But note that the White tendency towards suicidality extends all the way to the Mighty Whiteys themselves who condemn the racial suicidality of the liberal Whites.

So look. The WN’s are suicidal too. They want to preserve the White race while hating most Whites and casting them out of the race, leaving only a minority group that is actually really and truly pure White. WN’s gatekeep worse than Studio 54 in 1978.

You throw a party, then you throw most of the people out claiming that they weren’t invited and special enough to get in. That’s a good recipe for a crappy party, not to mention a few fistfights or worse around the keg.

Whites: the suicidal race. Prove me wrong!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

On the Difficult Case of Saint Henry Ford

I admit I am a bit of an antisemite. Not too much of one! Nazis are evil! But just a bit. You know those recipes that call for a “pinch” of this or that? I mean not 1/4 or even 1/8 of teaspoon. Less than even that! Well, that’s how antisemitic I am. Just a pinch.

Actually I think all Gentiles should be. Judeophilia is stupid as blind love for any race is stupid. No race should be worshiped blindly. We are all humans, and all human races are a bit evil or have that potential simply on account of being made up of humans, as humans are at least a bit evil, and that’s on a good day!

And as a “pinch antisemite” type, I have chosen to worship Saint Henry Ford as one of my antisemite secular Gods. Feel free to hate on me for that. I’m used to it.

Saint Ford was not perfect. No saint is, not even Saint Jesus. St. Ford’s scriptures, the long-running, Hadith-like commentaries in the great Dearborn Independent, are actually excellent and hardly antisemitic at all. They’re just one endless cynical and exasperated lament at the typically terrible Jewish behavior of the times. Check them out if you can dig them up. Fascinating stuff.

His greatest scriptural document, The International Jew, was excellent and was not even particularly antisemitic at all. In fact as antisemitic documents go, it’s one of the mildest and least offensive ones ever written. Antisemitic speech tends to be nasty as Hell, often murderous and not uncommonly genocidal. TIJ is neither. Further, it was written with a kind heart in the spirit of racial peace. It was actually an early antiracist tract!

He was mostly just exasperated with Jews for being such separatist, selfish, and Other-hating jerks. TIJ was a call for Jews to knock off the Gentile-hatred and especially the Jewish Ethnic Wars against the Gentiles, which were quite hot at that time.

At one point in the book his exasperation is clear. He points out that he never supported one pogrom and thought that pogroms were sickening and horrible. He called for the Jews to stop fighting us and smoke the peace pipe. He said Jews were too busy being Jews to be real Americans, and that was sad and frustrating.

Quit being Jews and start being Americans instead was the message. In other words, TIJ and even The Dearborn Independent are just a couple more works in favor of the assimilation of the Jews, which is generally a good and even progressive thing anyway. Unassimilated Jews don’t act real great. Face it.

Come,  Jews! Come join us Gentiles in building a better America!

Henry Ford, The International Jew

What a beautiful, albeit exasperated, remark! Of course the Jews didn’t listen, and I’m still not sure if they have joined the rest of us here in the US or not. I wish to believe they have, but I do wonder.

But even this scripture, TIJ, is flawed. Ford believed in the Czarist forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a hate book that led to the murders of a lot of Jews. That book is just stupid.

And no, Jews don’t “act like that anyway even if it’s a forgery.” Bad argument. It’s just a stupid and wrong bit of hate speech and hate lie that killed a lot of people. Nasty stuff. Well, St. Ford ignorantly believed the Protocols. Dumb, almost criminal stupidity. His later meetings with Hitler were downright stupid too and even ignorantly wicked. He accepted the genocidal maniac Hitler’s praises, and that was more criminal idiocy.

He paid for it when the Jews tried to murder him by running his car off the road in the mid- 1930’s. Most people don’t know this and the Jews will scream, deny it and call you an antisemite for bringing it up, but oh yeah, it definitely happened all right. He almost died. He eased up on the Jews after, which I guess was smart.

My former Jewish girlfriend and I really split on the subject on St. Ford. Usually she agreed with everything I said about Jews and then one-upped me to go beyond that. Jews are profoundly antisemitic themselves as the sin is currently defined.

I defended St. Ford and boy was she mad. She really hated him. She grew up in Detroit and St. Ford was Antisemite Enemy #1 to Detroit Jews.

We had a fun relationship. During the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1996, I openly supported Hezbollah and cheered them on right to her face. She would just laugh, tell me to shut up, and defend Israel. I’d say, “Go Hezbollah go!”, she’d laugh and retort and the match was on. Good times!

Once I asked her why she was defending Israel, and she thought a bit and said, “I ‘m defending my people.” Great answer. Nothing wrong with defending or supporting your people. Racial self-haters are rather disgusting to me. I even with Blacks to take pride in themselves.

Sure, Blacks are fucked up. Duh. But are you, a good Black person, fucked up too? Well, of course not. Then take pride in being a Great Black Man or Woman, whichever it is. Pride is always admirable and groveling is always disgusting, no matter the race or ethnicity.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

On the Phrase “Jerry Rigging” (And a More Racist Equivalent Phrase)

Polar Bear: There’s such a thing as Black stability. I went to college with a postal worker and had multiple black coworkers that remind me of the same black guy. Simple men that were easy to get along with.

More like Black practicality to me  rather than stability. But practicality itself is rather stabilizing, no? Black people are pragmatic. They have common sense. That’s one thing I really like about Black people.

You know that phrase called jerry-rigging? Well, another name for that is nigger-rigging. I know, racist. But people around me (My peers, not my parents and their friends – are you kidding?!) have been using that word my whole life in reference to their own actions, so I’m not even sure if it’s an insult.

I mean is it really a racist insult? A White person says he nigger-rigged something. Ok? That means…what? It means he’s acting like a nigger, right? That’s why I’m not even sure it’s all that racist. It’s sort of Whites calling themselves niggers, which doesn’t seem all that racist.

Incidentally, we Whites do call ourselves and each other niggers. It’s a lot more acceptable than calling Black people that word. I just called my friend a nigger or called myself a nigger? How is that racist? I mean it’s an insult when you use it against a Black…when you use it against a White, what does it even mean?

It’s like straight guys calling  each other fags, which is a lot more common nowadays than calling gay men that. How is that hatred of gays? I just called my friend a fag as a joke. That means I hate gay guys? Come  on.

Anyway, back to the subject.

Even people who almost never called Black people niggers would use that phrase nigger-rigging.

“How did you fix it?”

“Oh, I just kinda nigger-rigged it. It’s good for now at least anyway.”

Usually chuckles follow because that word is always sort of funny for some reason.

To nigger-rig or to jerry-rig (let’s switch to jerry-rigging – enough with uncomfortable words) something means a cheap, adaptive, half-assed yet workable and ultimately ingenious sort of a half-fix that is “good for now” but is not a long-term solution for the problem. It’s just a cheap, temporary fix.

It’s not a half-assed fix because you are lazy. It’s half-assed because you don’t have the materials on hand to fix it properly. But it’s a temporary fix that “works for now.” There is also a hint of ingenuity, inventiveness, cleverness, and adaptability in it. Which is why, despite the racism, the phrase is ultimately a compliment to Blacks.

Black people perhaps historically being often short on the money and materials needed to do a proper fix on something would then master the art of jerry-rigging (hence the version with the slur) not out of laziness but out of the necessity of the moment. Necessity being the mother of invention after all. Why do it? Because you don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, that’s why.

What I like about the idea of the association of Blacks with jerry-rigging is that it suggests that Blacks are inventive, clever, adaptive, and ingenious in a sense (in a practical, not world-class inventor) way. And if you know Black people well, you know that is indeed a characteristic of them. Jerry-rigging isn’t good for long-term fixes. What’s it good for? Short-term fixes which are needed for…what? How about survival? Black people know how to survive. I’ll give them that.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Being Good Little Boys Hasn’t Benefited Whites

Polar Bear: Whites really get nothing for being a good little boy. If anything you get more complaints and called racist more.

They just beat us up even more the more we get down on your knees, admit our guilt, and beg for forgiveness. Plus it sets you up for reparations and other bullshit. This is pretty typical. You supplicate yourself like that, people just think you are weak and beat you up even more.

Plus the White-hating SJWs are out for blood. They won’t settle for just an apology. I am convinced that they actually want to hurt Whites in some way or other, probably to elevate some non-Whites in their place. How many times have you seen demands for quotas these days in everything from the Oscars to IT, to, well, everything.

We’ve been pussing out for a while now, and all it makes them do is scream racism louder and louder. The feminists are very much the same way.

Most of these movements don’t have much of an endpoint where the grievance is resolved and everyone shakes hands and goes home and has a beer together. The model seems to be continuous grievance forever.

You give them some stuff and then they just move the goalposts again and scream even louder how oppressed they are. You see this exact same thing with the feminists. There’s no endgame. You can’t win. At some point you have to recognize that these people are your enemies and start fighting back against them.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The SJW’s Have It Wrong: Whites are Not the Worst People on Earth; Instead They Are the Best People on Earth

Examples: Americans feel bad about slavery and the American Indian genocide and have frankly already made significant reparations in all sorts of ways to both groups.

Don’t listen to Indian and Black SJW race hustlers. No one other than Whites would have sacrificed so much of their self-interest and behaved as altruistically towards formerly exploited groups as Whites have.

Show me one other group of people anywhere on Earth that has acted out this much guilt and self-abnegation and been so giving and even self-sacrificing towards people they used to exploit. You won’t find one single group of people anywhere on that has done that to anywhere near the extent that Whites have.

The SJW’s and Black and Indian race hustlers have it all wrong. Instead of being the worst people on Earth, Whites are actually the best people on Earth. And not for any of the reasons the White Supremacists say.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: An Overview of the Early Years of the Cuban Revolution, 1954-1961

transformer: What do you think of this article Robert? I don’t trust right wing sources but how literate was Cuba back in 1959?

That website is falsely named. It is not an “intellectual” website dedicated to the intellect and the pursuit of knowledge. Sure, it is an erudite, bright, and educated website, but the only intellectuals it appeals to are hard rightwingers. It’s basically the philosophy of your average American conservative Republican. Those sites are run by ideologues, and they are not very honest.

I will try to take apart this argument as best as I can, but if you Google these questions, there are many leftwing websites who offer far better rejoinders than I offer here, especially with more facts, figures, and dates.

That argument is not good because there was vast poverty in the countryside along with terrible health and dental care. There was vast inequality in Cuba. There was quite a bit of wealth in the cities, particularly in Havana, but the conditions in the countryside were awful, pure 3rd World.

To give an example, I believe that there may have been no doctors in Cuba outside of Havana. All of the doctors and dentists lived in Havana serving people with money for cash so they could make a lot of money. The Mafia owned Cuba, and Havana was a sleazefest full of criminals, gangsters, and prostitutes.

Blacks had essentially no rights at all. They actually lived under a strict Jim Crow-like segregation that was as bad as what existed in the South. The Blacks in Cuba were fucked.

The whole country was owned by foreign, mostly US, interests, including the sugar cane and tobacco fields, the cigar and nickel industries and the casinos and bars. A few country-sellers latched onto the large US corporations that ran everything in Cuba and got their fair share of the loot.

But the Cuban people as a whole, meaning the Cuban state, barely saw a nickel of profits from any of those foreign-owned fields and industries. There also was little or no trickle down effect from the foreign-owned industry. Most Cubans felt that Cuba had once more become a colony of the US. After all, it was more or less owned by US companies, right?

Cuba used to be a colony of the US. We stole it from the Spanish after the Spanish American War. US rule was not popular. Jose Marti is known as the liberator of Cuba. He led an insurrection in 1898 in which Cuba gained its freedom. The Philippines was also rebelling at this time.

But after the US left, in 1911, a new law was passed called the Platt (?) Amendment that basically said that the US still ruled Cuba and had a right to intervene in Cuba’s affairs anytime it wanted to.

Even the most rightwing anti-Castro Cubans are not particularly pro-US, and if you bring up that amendment, they’ve all heard of it, and they act angry about. After all, most anti-Castro types are Cuban nationalists. Cubans are very nationalistic and proud people. That amendment remained in place until Castro won the revolution in 1959.

Batista’s army collapsed without even much of a fight because at one point in the revolution, even the middle classes in the cities went over to Castro. When the middle class supports a revolution, you are out of power. Previously the middle class had probably been mostly neutral.

Batista was also horribly corrupt and no one was happy about that. As Castro overran Havana, Batista and his government flew out to the US on airplanes. The US lifted them out. There are still quite a few pro-Batista Cubans in the Cuban community in Cuba. That’s why the Cuban exiles are not popular in Cuba.

A lot of Cubans in the countryside were not literate. Even schooling was bad out there. And Castro did run a literacy program that got the country to 99% literacy very quickly.

Castro was middle or even upper-class himself. He was Galician of almost pure Spanish blood (Cuba is full of Galicians). He had just graduated from law school, and he was in fact an attorney. So he was a very smart guy.

Che was actually a physician! He graduated from medical school in Argentina and was granted a license to practice medicine. I’m not sure if he ever actually practiced medicine. He was also a very smart guy.

Che took a motorcycle tour around Latin America, and he was appalled at the poverty he saw there. He had grown up in Buenos Aires in a moneyed family, and this was a hidden secret about the continent for him. A book called The Motorcycle Diaries was later published using the notes he took as he traveled around South America.

He became radicalized by his bike tour. He heard about the Revolution in Cuba, and he went there to help them out pure idealism with stars in his eyes. Che was also White like Castro and came from old Buenos Aires money. He probably had Italian and Spanish blood at the least, like most Argentines.

He married in Cuba and had a couple of kids before he was murdered by the CIA in a hospital in Bolivia in 1967 after being arrested in the nation for rebellion. He was very good to his wife and young children. The wife and children are still alive. You can even go see his son if you go to Cuba and have the right connections.

His wife and kids remember him very fondly. Che was a selfless and altruistic man. There is a slogan in Cuba: “Be like Che.” It is very popular. It means to be selfless and idealistic and sacrifice for others, to not be selfish and greedy. The slogan is popular among university students in particular. If you go to Cuba, you will hear Cuban university students, male and female, saying that their philosophy is to “be like Che.”

There must have been something wrong with the Batista system because a lot of university students, teachers, etc. took part in the early demonstrations against Batista. At some point, the Left went to the mountains and took up arms.

Either before or after, Batista ran death squads that rampaged through Cuba’s cities, murdering teachers, students, and the unarmed Left in general. They murdered thousands of defenseless and unarmed Cubans this way.

The army would not even fight for Batista. That’s how corrupt he was. In fact, many of the anti-Castro Cubans fought with Castro in the mountains to get rid of Batista, but they turned on him when he went Communist. They felt betrayed. I don’t mind these exiles so much. I have spoken with some of their children. At least they fought with Castro. But they tend to be very bitter. They think they got double-crossed and backstabbed by Castro.

Castro was originally simply a social democrat, and the initial revolutionary program was a social democratic one.

However, it was a very nationalistic revolution, and they started seizing foreign-owned businesses very quickly. The Cubans offered to pay off the owners for the market value of the businesses over a 30-year period. That offer it still in effect. 100% of the people and corporations who got their property taken turned down that offer, possibly out of pride and certainly out of ideology.

So their businesses didn’t really get confiscated. Castro offered to pay full value for them, but these stubborn reactionaries turned down the offer. It’s their own damn fault they lost their businesses.

The seizing of the foreign-owned property went on for a couple of years and was extremely popular among the extremely nationalistic Cubans. So you can see that Castro’s revolution, like Mao’s and Ho’s, was also and perhaps primarily a nationalist revolution.

Castro went to New York soon after he took power, and he was greeted with large crowds of cheering supporters. Castro talked about how much he loved America and Americans. I believe he was sincere. A lot of the US ruling class – the rich and corporations – were very suspicious of Castro from the start. They didn’t trust him. They didn’t hate him. They were just very leery of him.

Castro asked for US support and aid to help rebuild the country, but the US had turned hostile  by then due to the business confiscations and refused to give him a nickel. This went on for a couple of years with each side getting more hardened until Castro finally turned to the USSR in desperation in 1961 for support since the US was flipping him off.

Castro’s argument was that he tried to have a relationship with the US, and we told him to go to Hell, so we forced him into the arms of the Soviets. He sealed an alliance with the USSR in 1961. The US promptly imposed a cruel embargo on Cuba which has been there ever since.

The embargo’s official justification was to cause so much poverty and misery in Cuba that the people would rise up and overthrow Castro. Here it is 60 years later, and we still give the exact same reason for the embargo. If the embargo is intended to cause the people to overthrow Castro, when is it going to start working? So far it’s been 60 years of utter failure, but we keep chasing the White Whale.

Over the next year, Castro grew increasingly radical, and by 1962, he abandoned social democracy, his originally ideology, and took up Marxism-Leninism. After Castro went Communist, a lot of his old comrades turned against him along with many others who were not happy with his turn to the hard Left. These contras took up arms, formed guerrilla bands in the mountains, and waged a brutal civil war that went on until 1970.

Yes, the Cuban government executed 10,000 people between 1959-1970, but almost all were for “rebellion,” typically armed rebellion. There have hardly been any executions since.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Social Democracy Only Works in Homogeneous Societies Is Often but Not Completely True

RL:

The US and a handful of other countries are literally the only countries on this planet that regard social democracy with outrage and want nothing to do with it.

A commenter responds:

Mithridates: Yeah, I suspect much of this attitude stems from the ethnic divisions within the US that no one is ever allowed to talk about in any sort of frank or intellectually honest manner. Of course the Pluto/Mammon-worship inherent in the American mythos is a influential factor as well.

But let’s explore the first:

Basically, Ethnos A, the group responsible for most of the country’s productivity, is forced at gunpoint to redistribute a portion of their wealth to Ethnos B (and C in some regions), and a good portion of Ethnos B takes that money, pisses it away on all sorts of stupid instant gratification fuckery and doesn’t add much of anything to the country’s overall productivity; in fact, a sizable minority of Ethnos B behaves in public like zoo animals.

And then A’s gets called horrible bigots if they object to this, and especially if they object to being forced to live within shouting distance of B’s.

Most of the countries with working social democratic economic arrangements tend to have been ethnically homogeneous for most of the period when these systems were in place. And now these countries have tried the mass immigration experiment, and the same sort of shitty results is happening in those places that we here in the US have been experiencing for many decades now.

Natural Law says that humans are extra-clever social primates who are predisposed to be open to sharing among others they consider to be kin. There’s a certain other Ethnos I won’t mention by name or even a single-letter set of punctuation marks that exemplifies this principle very clearly.

Anyway, expecting all members of an Ethnos to consider the entire planet’s population of clever hominids to be a part of their kin group is quite an aberrant expectation; only weird ideologies can invert what to everyone else is a common sense understanding of Natural Law principles. And finally, loving one’s own kin does not necessarily mean hating other kin-groups.

Of course everyone has always known that this is the dirty little secret for Americans’ hostility to socialism. This is why all of the American White Nationalists are also hardline economic Rightists, Republicans and Libertarians despite this being bad for most Whites. Race trumps economics for a lot of folks. Whereas in Europe, most of the nationalist groups, even the White nationalists, are explicitly socialist.

You’d be pissed to, eh?

Actually I am fully aware of this argument, but I’m not pissed at all. For one thing, I have never been part of the wealthy White group, so Whites with money can go pound sand. They are my class enemies. I think in terms of economics. Screw race. Do the rich Whites want to help the poorer Whites? Of course not. So why should I support them. Also I know quite a few low-income Whites who use those redistributive programs that Whites hate so much.

On the other hand, I am not a typical White person. I am very hard to the Left; in fact, I am an out and out socialist.

Many countries have health care for all despite being ethnically diverse. However, in a lot of these countries, public health care and education is simply underfunded, so the dominant group, whoever they may be, simply goes to private hospitals and schools. India is an excellent example of this as is much of Latin America.

All of the Arab World has social democracy under the rubric of Islam, or in the case of Lebanon, ethnic peace, and Lebanon is unstable for ethnic/religious reasons. And some Arab countries with prominent religious of ethnic minorities are very unstable or at war.

All of North Africa has social democracy except Morocco, although minority Berbers are dealt with by denial of their existence and roping them into the main group, Arabs. Ethiopia has tremendous ethnic diversity and some religious diversity, but they have a good working socialist system. Eritrea is the same but the main divide there is religious rather than ethnic.

Zimbabwe has a good working system although it has many tribes. Argentina and formerly Bolivia and Ecuador has or had working social democracies, although all three countries had serious instabilities; in all cases the rich objecting to sharing with the poor and with a racial element in Bolivia. A number of countries in Latin America do have social democracies, but they don’t work very well because the rich don’t want to share with the poor.

In a number of those countries such as Peru, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Haiti,and Mexico also have an ethnic element in that the dominant rich group tends to be Whiter or lighter-skinned though not usually White per who don’t want to share with the poorer, darker, folks who are more mixed with Indian and in some cases Blacks.

A number of countries in Latin America have homogeneous populations, but the rich still don’t want to share with the poor, so that doesn’t solve everything. And historically speaking, most nations were quite homogeneous, nevertheless the rich still shared just about fuck all with everyone else and needed an actual revolution to be convinced to do so.

Russia and China has very good working social democracies although they have many minorities, although China and to some extent Russia has some ethnic warfare. Ukraine has a good system despite minorities and ethnic warfare. Vietnam, Cambodia, Bhutan, and Laos have good systems despite having anywhere to a couple to many ethnic minorities. Malaysia has a working social democracy and it has a large ethnic divide. Japan has minorities with an excellent social democracy.

Most of the former Soviet republics probably still have working systems although most have large minority populations.Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Iran have social democracies and minority groups. However, in Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Iran are currently embroiled in ethnic separatist wars.

Most of the countries with non-working systems are not only rightwing but also quite poor. Hong Kong is an exception. The government is very rightwing, but there are not ethnic problems. It’s all one ethnic group, but the rich ones hate the poor ones, just as it was traditionally.

Some are just poor. Most of Africa has social democracy, but it often doesn’t work well due to poverty. To some extent this is true in Pakistan, Mongolia, Yemen, Moldova, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Burma, and Thailand. It is also true in Ecuador, Guatemala, most of the Caribbean, Chile, and Paraguay. In these places, social democracy doesn’t work more due to poverty than to diversity.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20