Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne, Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
“The mainline media concludes that the tea parties were attended by “all white” people who were “a bunch of racists,” and it was all about “hating a black man in the White house.” Again, the attendees were all “tea-banging rednecks.” MSNBC broadcast the opinion that any minority conservatives who did attend the tea parties were identified as “those suffering from Stockholm syndrome.” Stockholm syndrome is the syndrome where a kidnapping victim begins to psychologically identify with their kidnappers.”
I quote this because I believe this mindset is typical of many Americans who consider themselves not racist.
In this banal interview we learn that in order to avoid being considered a white racist one cannot oppose command and control, centralized governments. Indeed, the interview seems to suggest that what makes racist white people racist is that they are opposed to being enslaved by the Federal government.
So, what it means to be typically white and a part of typical white culture is to be for individual freedom and individual responsibility. Anybody who is a minority that is for these things must have a psychological disease. Hence, minorities that attended the tea parties were, according to MSNBC, acting like white people. White people who act this way are to be pilloried and insulted. Minorities who act like white people are apparently to be pitied. This attitude explains the hatred that many black people had and have for Clarence Thomas. Justice Thomas, according to this theory, is behaving white by believing in individual responsibility.
It would seem necessary then to conclude that the superior non-white people and non-white culture is that people and culture that desire to be in slavery to the state, and that which opposes individual freedom and individual responsibility. If a white person wants to be part of the superior non-white culture they have to abandon notions such as personal responsibility and be in favor of some form of collectivism.
Do minorities really desire that what it means to be “Black” or what it means to be “Hispanic” be defined as a culture that is dependent upon the state, as a culture that is for personal irresponsibility, as a culture that desires to be forever beholden to handouts, and as a culture that defines racism and prejudice as being that mindset that opposes those very same things?
You see, I’m confused by all this because if that is what racism means then I am a racist and it would seem to my thinking that everybody should want to be a racist.
“The long-term prospect—the type of country our grandchildren and great grandchildren will struggle to live in—should drive the programs, policies, and objectives of our leading immigration-reform organizations. And the type of country future generations of native-stock Americans will inherit rests on this maxim: demography is destiny! (If for no other reason than that the races vote systematically differently, and current immigration policy is driving the U.S. further to the left.)
Opposing mass illegal and legal immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity while disregarding the role of race and ethnicity—above all in establishing the criteria for immigrant selection—is largely why we’re in the mess we’re in. It is the equivalent of not only misdiagnosing a patient but prescribing the wrong treatment—treating someone who has advanced throat cancer with Listerine.
The way out of this mess (if there is a way out) will depend on a multifaceted long-term strategy. A sizable increase in white birthrates; stripping out the incentives for non-traditional immigrants to relocate to the U.S.; reversing the cultural pollution of our “entertainment industry”, which promotes diversity, multiculturalism and white demoralization—all would make for a good start.”
Today I received a unrequested and unsolicited complimentary “Victory Church Products” junk mail catalog in the mail today. On page 62 there was a European American products section. In that section I could purchase Church Bulletin covers honoring European American themes. There was a choice of ten I could choose from.
I could order a bulletin with the name and picture of the Andrews Sisters on the front cover. I could order a bulletin with the name and picture of Thomas Edison on the front cover. I could order a bulletin with the name and picture of Henrietta Cornelia Mears on the front cover. I could order a bulletin with the name and picture of Christy Matthewson on the front cover. I could order a bulletin with a picture of Dr. Rev. Benjamin Morgan Palmer on the front cover. I could order a bulletin with a picture of a older white woman kneeling at a church pew praying on the front cover. I could order a picture of a young white man holding a open bible in his left hand while picking up a communion cup with his right hand on the front cover. There were several others that were a little more generic.
I can’t say I’ve ever seen anything like that before.
Isn’t Church supposed to be about Christ and not ethnic exaltation?
Yesterday, in cities throughout the nation, small pockets (numbering, in the 100’s at each location) of people gathered to have tea parties in order to protest the socialist / communist policies of B. Hussein Obama and his administration. I looked at the pictures of the protests at these gatherings in Lansing Mi., Hartford Co., Nashville Tn., Austin Tx., Houston Tx., Tulsa Ok., Chicago Il., and Los Angeles Ca. and one thing that you couldn’t help notice is that how thoroughly White these protests were. There were a extraordinarily small sprinkling of minorities in attendance but by and large these protests were organized and attended by White people.
Now, I realize that this observation is hardly scientific in the way that Gallup or Roper would do a poll but I still think it says something about the way the opposition to the socializing of America is shaping up.
The Obama administration has made it clear in subtle and not so subtle ways that they are waging racial economic warfare on White people. In one of the more not so subtle ways we had civilian economic adviser, and former Clinton Labor Secretary, Robert Reich, explicitly say in testimony before Congress that the stimulus money need not go to “White construction workers.”
Approximately ten days ago we had Vice President Biden introducing alleged President Obama (alleged because we still don’t know, due to citizenship issues, if he is even qualified to be President) noting that this was going to be an economic recovery characterized by “fairness.” Now if you listen to Biden in the context of Reich, who is also clearly concerned about “fairness” you begin to wonder if “fairness” is code language for a racial transfer of wealth from White people to minorities.
But lets not stop there. We have yet to mention Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder stating that,
“Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RtzGraUV9c
Now, while we won’t spend any time refuting Holder’s asinine statement where he seeks to foster white guilt while inciting a sense of Black entitlement, does any body with half a brain believe that Attorney General Holder believes that Black people are cowards when it comes to things racial? I think not. It is my decided opinion that Holder has White people in his sites with this kind of statement. It is White people who are cowards when it comes to things racial.
But we are not finished with this verbal racial onslaught of the Obama administration against white people — a verbal onslaught that is now getting translated to economic racial socialism. Consider the Benediction that was given by Rev. Joseph Lowery at the Obama inauguration.
Lowry intoned a benediction based upon a song titled, “Black, Brown and White”
“We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right.”
Now, take all of this that has been provided and remember Michelle’s comments during the campaign season that revealed that during Barack’s campaign Michelle, for the first time in her life, was proud to be an American. Was it perceived racial oppression that took Michelle’s pride to be an American from her?
Take all of this that has been provided and remember B. Hussein’s comments during the campaign about people in small towns in Pennsylvania (hardly a bastion of Black demographics) that,
“It’s not surprising then they (small town Pennsylvanians) get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Take all of this that has been provided and now add the specter of B. Hussein Obama’s Spiritual mentor for twenty years — Rev. Jeremiah Wright — easily one of the most White hating people to hit the public spotlight for quite some time.
Add all this together and it is not difficult to see why minorities are not showing up at protests against the Obama’s proposed socialism agenda. Minorities rightly believe that this transfer of wealth is going to go from White people to minorities. Now, there is little sense trying to convince people that in the end this racial socialism won’t lift the impoverished minorities but will merely eliminate the producing class that the welfare class so desperately depends upon.
In closing I am perfectly aware that there are minorities out there that exist that are as disgusted as any White person is concerning Obama’s racial socialism. These minorities understand that in the long run this kind of program reduces their people to slaves to the state and so are radically opposed to it. These people are to be applauded, but we must admit that their numbers in comparison to those minorities who support this racial socialism (as seen in voting patterns) is scant. Secondly, I’m perfectly aware that there are White people who are for Obama’s racial socialism. White people, on one end of the wealth spectrum, have always had their ‘poor white trash’ they have had to deal with, while on the other end of the wealth spectrum, White people have always had ‘rich white trash’ who would sell out their people if by doing so they could enrich themselves. All this to say that I realize that one can not speak in absolute racial universals on this subject, but instead only in predominant racial tendencies.
We might as well admit it that much of the Obama administration has a racial chip on their shoulder and that they are seeking to implement not just socialism but racial socialism.
What is humorous about a post like this is that people will insist that my noticing objective patterns of behavior by the Obama administration proves that I am the racist. It will be contested by some that all because I perceive how they are waging war on White people that therefore I am the racist.
“Yet where is the evidence that minorities will be willing to give up their traditional affirmative action privileges as they become majorities and gain the votes so they no longer have to rely politically upon the goodwill of whites for their privileges?”
Steven Sailer
Columnist
The arrangement for the last 70 years or so is that white majority culture, in order to atone for their putative racist past, have paid by way of affirmative action and welfare policies a ransom to mollify the minority culture who have constantly played their victim status. Now however, the game is changing. Reports suggest that whites will no longer be the majority ethnic culture by 2042.
Now how will this change the game? Well, the question is whether or not minority cultures will be as proficient at production as white culture was in the hay day of America being an economic powerhouse. Sailer gives a glimpse on how that arrangement is working out in California where whites comprise only 43% of the population.
” Fortunately, we already have a gigantic test case: California, which is now only 43 percent non-Hispanic white.
So what can we learn about the future of America from California, where the state government may run out of money next month without a federal bailout?
For most of this decade, the financial wizards poured hundreds of billions of dollars into mortgage-backed securities originating in California. In other words, they made a colossal bet on diversity.
And lost.
In 2007, it suddenly dawned on the bright boys of Wall Street that a huge fraction of the subprime borrowers of California (and the other three similar “sand states”—Arizona, Nevada, and Florida) weren’t ever going to earn enough to pay off their huge new mortgages. Nor would California’s “post-white” populace find Greater Fools to upon whom to unload their dumpy half-million dollar houses.
This triggered the end of the global economy as we know it.
It turned out that, while California’s new diverse population could certainly consume and speculate like old-fashioned white Americans, they couldn’t produce like them.”
The question thus arises; ‘How will the minority population with an addiction to the drugs of affirmative action and welfare programs respond in a culture that no longer has produced an excess to the point that they can easily get their fix?’