Manchurian White Supremacists

Kurt Nimmo

There are disturbing similarities between the shootings in El Paso, Pittsburgh, and San Diego. If news reports can be believed, John Earnest, the synagogue shooter in California, had it out for Jews, as did Robert G. Bowers in Pittsburgh. Both posted so-called manifestos online. So did Patrick Crusius, the alleged El Paso shooter, the difference being his manifesto denounced Mexicans.

The alleged shooter in New Zealand, Brenton Tarrant, posted a manifesto denouncing Muslims. Dylann Roof, who allegedly killed nine people at a black church in South Carolina, also issued what the corporate media described as a manifesto. Tarrant is said to have left behind a 74-page document titled “The Great Replacement.”

All these documents preach a similar form of racism described as white supremacy by the state and its corporate media. This racism is attributed to the so-called Alt-right or the New Right without evidence or even a clear definition of terms. It is also used to describe those of us who are not politically pigeonholed as right or left and yet are suspect for our critique of the financial class and its banking cartels and interlocked corporate structure. This is described by the state and its media as antisemitic, thus a hate crime.

Timing is everything, Several days before the incident in El Paso, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the Senate Judiciary Committee a “majority of the domestic terrorism cases we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence.”

This was followed by Democrat presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren who declared white supremacy as a domestic terror threat. “We need to call out white supremacy for what it is: domestic terrorism. And it poses a threat to the United States of America,” she said during the supposed debate in Detroit last week.

Then, on August 1, two days before the El Paso incident, it was reported the FBI “for the first time has identified fringe conspiracy theories as a domestic terrorist threat, according to a previously unpublicized document.

Read more

Candace Owens Flips The Script At Dem Hearing On White Nationalism: The 'Goal' Here Is to Scare Minorities Into Supporting Censorship

Information Liberation

Conservative activist Candace Owens derailed Jerry Nadler's House Judiciary Committee hearing on "Hate Crimes and White Nationalism" by calling it out as a farce to scare minorities into supporting censorship and the Democratic Party.

Rush transcript via Real Clear Politics:

CANDACE OWENS, TURNING POINT USA: Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Mr. Collins thank you for having me here today. I received word on my way in that many of the journalist were confused as to why I was invited and none of them knew that I am myself was a victim of a hate crime when I was in high school. That is something that very few people know about me because the media and the journalists on the left are not interested in telling the truth about me because I don't fit the stereotype of what they like to see in black people. I am a Democrat. I support the President of the United States and I advocate for things that are actually affecting the black community.

I am honored to be here today in front of you all because the person sitting behind me is my 75-year-old grandfather. I have always considered myself to be my grandfather's child and I mean to say that my sense of humor, my passion and my work ethic all comes from the man that is sitting behind me.

My grandfather grew up on a sharecropping farm in the segregated South. He grew up in an America where words like racism and white nationalism held real meaning under the Democratic Party's Jim Crow laws. My grandfather's first job was given to him at the age of five years old and his job was to lay tobacco out to dry in an addict in the South. My grandfather has picked cotton and he has also had experiences with the Democrat terrorist organization of that time, the Ku Klux Klan. They would regularly visit his home and they would shoot bullets into it. They had an issue with his father, my great-grandfather.

During my formative years I have the privilege of growing up in my grandfather's home. It is going to shock the committee but not once, not in a single breath of a conversation did my grandfather and tell me that I could not do something because of my skin color. Not once did my grandfather hold a gripe against the white man. I was simply never taught to view myself as a victim because of my heritage. I--I learned about faith in God, family and hard work. Those were the only lessons of my childhood.

There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist, more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up and yet we are hearing these terms center around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election.

Here are some things we never hear. 75 percent of the black boys in California don't meet state reading standards. In inner cities like Baltimore within five high schools and one middle school not a single student was found to be proficient in math or reading in 2016. The singlehood--these single motherhood rate in the black community which is at 23 percent in the 1960s when my grandfather was coming out is at a staggering 74 percent today. I am guessing there will be no committee hearings about that. There are more black babies born--there are more black babies aborted than born alive in cities like New York and you have Democrat governor Andrew Cuomo lighting of buildings to celebrate late-term abortions. I could go on and on. My point is that white nationalist--white nationalism does not do any of those things that I just brought up. Democrat policies did. Let me be clear the hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes, it is about fear mongering, power and control. It is a preview of a Democrat 20/20 election strategy the same as the Democrat 2016 election strategy. They blame Facebook. They blame Google. They blame Twitter. Really, they blame the birth of social media which has disrupted their monopoly on minds. They called this hearing because they believe that if it wasn't for social media voices like mine would never exist, that my movement Blexit which is inspiring lack of Americans to lead--to leave the Democrat party would have never come about and they certainly believe that Donald Trump would not be in office today.

Looking on the next thing to focus on now that the Russian collusion hoax has fallen apart. What they won't tell you about the statistics and the rise of white nationalism is that they have simply change the data set points by widening the definition of hate crimes and upping the number of reporting agencies that are able to report on them. What I mean to say is that they are manipulating statistics.

Read more

FARMLANDS (2018)

Lauren Southern 

 Details the plight of South African farmers.

Thank you for watching! Please share to spread the word.

Website: https://laurensouthern.net 
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Lauren_Southern 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LaurenCSouth... 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/laurencheriie/

Jussie Smollett's hate crime hoax exposes America's shocking skepticism shortage

Michael McCaffrey
RT

Jussie Smollett story is a microcosm of what is wrong with America and the mainstream media.

On Thursday, US actor Jussie Smollett was arrested in Chicago after being charged with filing a false police report.

Smollett, a gay African-American actor who stars on the hit TV show Empire, claimed that on January 29 he was the victim of a hate crime when two white men hurled racist and homophobic slurs at him, punched, kicked and poured bleach over him, and then put a noose around his neck while taunting him by proclaiming "this is MAGA (Make America Great Again) country."
Smollett's story was dubious to some because the idea of two Trumpites out at 2am in progressive Chicago hunting gay black men with a noose and bleach in minus 20 degree weather seemed far-fetched, as does the idea that they would be pop-culturally aware enough to have watched Empire and recognize a marginal celebrity like Smollett in the first place.

In the wake of Smollett's unusual claims, the media uncritically accepted his story and numerous celebrities such as Emma Watson, Katy Perry, Olivia Munn, and Ariana Grande tweeted vociferous support. Actress Ellen Page gave a heartfelt speech on The Late Show with Colbert laying the blame for Smollett's attack at the feet of "homophobic" Vice President Mike Pence.

Democratic presidential hopefuls chimed as well, with Kamala Harris and Cory Booker both calling the attack a "modern-day lynching," and a cavalcade of other politicians who tweeted their unquestioning support for Jussie and devout belief in his story.
The problem with all of the belief in Smollett is that, like Ms. Page's impassioned Late Show rant, it was entirely based on emotion and not reason. 

Read more

The banal evil of Isis Davis-Marks: 'I'm watching you white boy'

Melissa Mackenzie
The American Spectator

"Totalitarianism appeals to the very dangerous emotional needs of people who live in complete isolation and in fear of one another." - Hannah Arendt

Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Yalies. They're the worst. And, as it turns out, evil. Isis Davis-Marks, a staff columnist for the Yale Daily News wrote a piece titled, "Evil is banal." Indeed. Ms. Davis-Marks then proceeded to unintentionally illustrate that fact.

Her first sentence is a tip-off, "Everyone knows a white boy with shiny brown hair and a saccharine smile that conceals his great ambitions." The word "saccharine" is used multiple times throughout her piece. There is no such thing a sweet smile from a white boy.

She fleshes out her argument:

When I'm watching the white boy - who is now a white man by this point - on CNN, I'll remember a racist remark that he said, an unintentional utterance that he made when he had one drink too many at a frat party during sophomore year. I'll recall a message that he accidentally left open on a computer when he forgot to log out of iMessage, where he likened a woman's body to a particularly large animal. I'll kick myself for forgetting to screenshot the evidence. And, when I'm watching him smile that smile, I'll think that I could have stopped it.

She wonders at the solution to stop this evil and comes to this conclusion:

To be honest, I'm not sure what the solution is. This expands beyond vocalizing problems about sexual assault: The core of this problem has to do with our values. The problem isn't just the Yale administration; it's Yale students. We allow things to skate by. We forget. We say, "No, he couldn't have done that," or, "But he's so nice." No questions are asked when our friends accept job offers from companies that manufacture weapons or contribute to gentrification in cities. We merely smile at them and wave as we walk across our residential college courtyards and do nothing. Thirty years later, we kick ourselves when it's too late. But I can't do that anymore - I can't let things slip by. I'm watching you, white boy. And this time, I'm taking the screenshot.

It's worthwhile to note her standards here.

1. Judge someone based on his skin color.
2. Judge the whole group based on the individual.
3. Note any "offense" - this seems broad as offenses change.
4. Ruin the reputation of said "evil" white boy in real-time if possible "boldly and publicly".
5. Hold onto evidence of "evil" for the white boy's later success.
6. Ruin the "white boy" at some later date with screenshots.

Read more

Is nouveau racism righteous retribution or just insanity?

Deraphim Hanisch
The Duran

We know that nouveau racism has been on the rise in America, even though no one calls it by this name.

What is it? Nouveau racism is racism. However, it is that racism which is embraced by "minority" groups, like African-Americans, Latin-Americans, feminists, and any group that is not the target group of their invective: the European-originated, white, Christian male.

Tucker Carlson gives a solid introduction to this topic in his own words in his reflection about one of America's leaders in the crusade of identity politics, Stacey Y. Abrams.  

Nouveau racism is often considered as "righteous retribution" by liberals who practice it. The logic is simple: After all that the European white MEN perpetrated upon native American nations, and upon the African peoples who were forcibly seized and brought to the New World as slave labor, women, blacks and native Americans now ought to give the white men a good taste of their own medicine. Let them see how it feels to be treated like we were, the narrative says.

The only thing is that the descendants of those European white men have largely long since renounced racism. The passage of the Civil Rights Law in 1964 marked the turning point that really had already been reached. The Act merely formalized what for many was already a present reality. After that, racism was loudly and strongly denounced in public service advertisements in the 1970's like this one:

Read more

'The Book Community' and the return of book-burning

Tim Dawson
Spiked

The Book Community has jumped the shark. Who are the 'Book Community'? Well, they're the nebulous group of super-woke flakes who bullied young-adult (YA) fantasy author Amelie Wen Zhao into pulling the publication of her debut novel, Blood Heir. While it wasn't slated for release until June, some review copies had been sent out. Apparently the book has already shaken some readers - and some people who obviously haven't read it - to the core. Zhao's depiction of slavery in one scene has been deemed problematic. Reverse racism, lack of genderqueer representation, and a central antagonist with a limp are some of the other criticisms leveled against it, and Twitter is fuming. Zhao has issued an apology and agreed with her publishers to cancel publication.

The novel is probably terrible. I'm not particularly into sword and sorcery stuff - though the fact that it has upset so many flakes has naturally piqued my interest. But you don't need to like, or even read, a book to defend its right to be published. Of course, Amelie Wen Zhao halted publication herself. You could argue that she has 'listened to feedback' and acted accordingly. But the line between listening to feedback and being bullied by very angry zealots is a thin one, and this incident seems to have crossed it. Zhao relies on these people for her income and is scared. That's understandable. And really, really bad. Our cultural landscape is increasingly controlled by the permanently outraged. Books - even trashy fantasy novels - are a key component of civilisation. They are tangible, material repositories of humanity, in all its forms. Burning books is the sign of a society going wildly wrong. Banning books, also. Scaring authors into pulling the publication of their books surely sits in the same egregious territory.

Nobody has a monopoly on morality and it is gross to try to force writers to comply with your particular worldview. There is no requirement for any minority group (or, for that matter, any majority group) to be represented in a story. There is no requirement when representation does occur for it to be positive or negative. People who think otherwise have forgotten what fiction is, and they have forgotten what freedom is, too. 

Read more

NewsReal: Is War on ('Islamic') Terror Morphing Into War on 'White Nationalism'?

NewsReal with Joe & Niall

The evils of 'white nationalism' has been a hot topic in the mainstream media lately, especially following the phony mail-bomb campaign targeting Democratic figures and the mass shooting of Jews at a Pittsburgh synagogue, sparking countless 'soul-searching' psychological profiles of 'the typical Trump supporter' ahead of the US Midterm elections.

If we reflect on older events, like the Battle of Charlottesville last year, or the massacre at a black church in Charleston in 2015, and even elsewhere in 'NATOstan' - the massacre of children of Norwegian elites by Anders Breivik in 2011, for example - it's clear that this theme of 'white extremists' holding severe grudges against 'all racial and ideological enemies' has been percolating to the surface for some time.

Is it mere coincidence then that - just as nationalist feeling is growing in countries the world over, and producing electoral results that 'shock' the status quo - extremist caricatures of nationalism begin proliferating, occasionally commit atrocities, and thus blacken nationalism and mandate government crackdowns on all dissent that 'smells like nationalism'?

This week on NewsReal With Joe & Niall, your hosts wonder if the 'War on Terror' has become what it apparently always wanted to be: a war on political dissidents...

Make no mistake, we are living under a diversity dictatorship

Zoe Strimpel
The Telegraph

When a Cambridge don of Indian heritage announced last week that she would no longer teach for a certain college in protest at “racist profiling and aggression” by the college porters, some onlookers – including yours truly – recoiled.

Among other things, the don was enraged and felt racially insulted that the porters had insisted on calling her “Madam”, as they do all women, rather than “Doctor”, as she’d demanded.

To certain friends and I, however, it seemed highly likely that the porters’ surliness was less racism and more a natural response to an obnoxious, arrogant and imperious member of the intellectual elite telling them what to do.

But these days, that sort of argument counts for nothing – worse, it could get you sacked, exiled, barred, no-platformed, bullied or worse. Those who cry repression and oppression – racism, sexism, transphobism – have become judge, jury and executioner.

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

We’ve seen countless times in the past year or so how anyone accused of an outrage against identity will immediately pay the price, from classicist Mary Beard accused of racism and mauled on Twitter as a result, to Germaine Greer, ceaselessly attacked for her unorthodox views on transsexual women and #MeToo.

Read more

White privilege versus racial paranoia

Steve Salerno
Quillette

If you are white and enjoy any level of public platform - politician, professor, policy wonk - and you use said platform to address social issues, you are certain to be accused of seeing life through the distortive prism of white privilege. Black leaders and social justice firebrands will make the allegation in the most austere terms - witness that spicy moment during a recent debate on political correctness when Michael Eric Dyson bluntly labeled his conservative adversary, Jordan Peterson, a "mean, mad white man." Even those on the Left, such as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, have not enjoyed immunity from this charge. Privilege is framed as a condition that, once acquired, can never be cured. However, it defies credulity to propose that Dyson and other leading social justice voices are alone in seeing life for what it really is, stripped of all parochial subtexts. Common sense suggests the existence of a complementary malady afflicting the accusers: racial paranoia, one might call it.

If some are inclined to miss the unfairness around them, is it not equally possible that others see unfairness where none exists? Nowhere in the public arena do paranoia and privilege collide more explosively than on the topic of unequal treatment under the law. In making their case, black advocates uniformly cite the videotaped incidents that by now have become an eponymous part of the national conversation on race: Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Philando Castile. All gave oxygen to Black Lives Matter, and later to the NFL's take-a-knee protests. Surely videos can be dramatic exhibits in mounting a case for extrajudicial violence. What a video cannot do, of course, is show us whether excessive force is excessively applied or racially motivated. For that we must turn to facts and figures.

A study out last week suggests that the view of law enforcement as a hotbed of racism is indeed highly inflected by paranoia. "Is There Evidence of Racial Disparity in Police Use of Deadly Force?" examines available data from police shootings in 2015 and 2016. The authors observe that determinations of bias normally are made simply by "comparing the odds of being fatally shot for Blacks and Whites, with odds benchmarked against each group's population proportion." That necessarily yields an incomplete picture, the authors assert, because of the substantial per capita difference in crime among blacks: "When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-Black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects."

Read more 

Child sex gang of eight 'predatory' men who abused girls as young as 13 - jailed for a total of almost 90 YEARS

Comment: There is no doubt that these gangs are of ethnic extraction and all immigrants. That flies in the face of politically correct ideology, but facts are facts. What is worse, part of the reason such gangs were allowed to exist for so long is because police and some members of the communities were afraid of being branded "racist"  if they were to speak up about these crimes.

The vast majority of immigrants and ethnic minorities are law-abiding and go about their business like anyone else.  But questions have to be asked why these grooming gangs were so systematic and widespread and almost exclusively drawn from ethnic immigrants. Is this the result of unfettered immigration policies which encourage a far too rapid migration of people atop and increasingly fragile economic system? Or is it that such psychopathy rises to the surface because it is symptomatic of a culture that is in decline regardless of immigration policies? Obviously, this is a complex subject.

Nonetheless, the experiment that is "multiculturalism" hasn't worked, quite apart from these aberrations.  You mix very different cultures together in a short space of time it is only logical that "cultural diversity" becomes a myth, replaced by misunderstanding, tension and resentment. It has nothing to do with racism but simple cultural logistics and the clash of basic values.

----------------------------------

Mail on Sunday

A group of men who abused teenage girls in a vehicle they called the 's**gwagon' have been jailed for a total of nearly 90 years.

The men - aged 36 to 48 - befriended vulnerable girls as young as 13 before plying them drink and drugs at 'parties' in Oxford.

The eight men - branded 'predatory and cynical' by a judge - have now been jailed for between seven and a half and fifteen years each.

Judge Peter Ross said the investigation into the gang had uncovered 'systematic and widespread grooming'.

Investigating officer DS Nicola Douglas branded the gang's crimes 'abhorrent', adding: 'None of the perpetrators have admitted their guilt or shown any remorse.'

She praised the victims for coming forward, saying: 'The impact of these offences on the victims, their families and relationships cannot be underestimated. 

'There are devastating consequences which last long after the offence is committed.

Read more

Course Claims 'Objectivity' Is A 'White Mythology'

Toni Airaksinen
Campus Reform

Hobart and William Smith Colleges is offering a course next year to teach students how “objectivity” and “meritocracy” function as “white mythologies.”

“White Mythologies: Objectivity, Meritocracy, and Other Social Constructions” is a sophomore-level course taught by Kendralin Freeman and Jason Rodriguez, who are sociology and anthropology professors, respectively.

“This course explores the history and ongoing manifestations of ‘white mythologies’—long-standing, often implicit views about the place of White, male, Euro-American subjects as the norm,” explains the course description, which adds that students will also “explore how systematic logics that position ‘the West’ and ‘whiteness’ as the ideal manifest through such social constructions as objectivity, meritocracy, and race.”

Though neither Freeman or Rodriguez responded to a request for more information from Campus Reform, both professors have worked together for a few years, and notably co-authored an article in the journal of Whiteness and Education together.

Read More 

Colorado Students Earn Credit for ‘Unmasking Whiteness’

campusreform.org

The University of Colorado-Colorado Springs is awarding three academic credits exclusively to white students who attend a conference dedicated to “white privilege.” 

The “Unmasking Whiteness” conference will convene students and educators from across the United States this July in North Hollywood, California to explore “how being white shapes our lives” and “discover our role as white people in struggle for social justice.” 

Only open to self-identifying white people, the four-day conference is co-organized by Shelly Tochluk, a professor at Mount Saint Mary’s University (MSMU) in Los Angeles, and is offered by the nonprofit AWARE-LA (Alliance of White Anti-Racists Everywhere). 

The recently-released conference brochure explains that attendees will learn about topics including “white privilege,” “guilt and shame,” “what it means to be white in today’s society,” and the “economic benefits” of whiteness. 

“U.S. society does not usually ask white people to explore how race affects our lives,” the brochure states. “When we honestly grapple with this question we become able to recognize the various ways we receive social and economic benefits based on being seen as part of the white group.” 

Read more

Charlottesville: Don't Take the Bait

Joe Quinn
Sott.net

The 'white supremacy' march and car attack on antifa counterprotestors at Charlottesville last week has been presented by the mainstream media as clear evidence of the endemic racism in America, particularly among Conservatives and those who voted for or support Donald Trump. There's a serious problem of racism and discrimination in America today, against Blacks, Latinos, homosexuals and transgenders, or so we're told. Something has to be done, therefore, and everyone should get behind these 'minorities' and their fight for 'equal rights'.

In this hystericized atmosphere, supposed 'representatives' of just about every other minority you can think of have jumped on the victimhood bandwagon. If you're a member of a minority and feel that you're being discriminated against, then you're actively encouraged to get out and protest about it. If you're a member of a minority group and don't feel like you're being discriminated against, then you've probably internalized and accepted the discrimination, and need to wake up and start protesting.

What all of this reveals is not so much that discrimination is rife in the USA today, but that victim-hood promises all sorts of unearned privileges and even power, so you'd be a fool not to get some while the getting is good.

But back to Charlottesville. The basic sequence of events is that a group of intellectually challenged, blowhard, would-be 'white supremacists' organized a march in the town to protest the proposed removal of a statue to Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Left wing activists organized a protest march. Pitched battles ensued and the cops mostly took the approach of standing back and letting them beat each other for a while until they inevitably had enough and went home.

But events took a deadly turn when a 'white supremacist' decided to drive his car through a group of antifa people, killing one woman and injuring several others. This was a god-send to those who would like to see social chaos spread as far and as wide as possible in the USA, because it served as 'evidence' that the tiny minority of 'white supremacists' - and the large demographic of Conservatives that supposedly support them along with 'their president - really are a deadly threat to multicultural America. In addition, it offered just cause for the radical left to push ahead with their dangerous agenda of attempting to enforce equality on everyone and wipe out discrimination of any kind.

Read more

Zionism: The explosion hidden inside the UN Apartheid report on Palestine

Jonathan Ofir
MondoWeiss

The UN-commissioned report on Israeli Apartheid that was shelved last week (two days after it appeared), is no doubt explosive. The very idea that Israel is guilty of the crime of Apartheid, one of the two gravest crimes against humanity (second only to Genocide), is, in itself, one that should give everyone pause.

But there is another explosion in the report.

Israel and its patrons have desperately sought to shelve a discussion about Zionism as a racist ideology. The Apartheid report brings it back to the front.

The report renders invalid all those apologetic 'warnings' of Apartheid that have been part of mainstream Israeli and American leadership rhetoric for years now (for instance, John Kerry, 2014). The report's implication is that Apartheid is not something that is soon to arrive or has just arrived; it is something that has been there all along, from the very birth of the state — in the "State's essentially racist character."

The report is bound to open up a debate about the foundation of the State of Israel, as well as the ideology that has informed it all along - Zionism. The discussion is bound to roll back to another shelved document - the UN Resolution 3379 (1975), which equates Zionism with racism.

The report states that Apartheid exists not only in the West Bank right now, but implies that it exists elsewhere, and has from the start. In fact, the Israeli Left's notions of 'separation from the Palestinians' - whether titled 'Peace plan' (as in Isaac Herzog's 10-point and 10-year plan) or conveyed by slightly more overtly racist scare campaigns for 'separation' by 'liberal' Generals - arguably falls squarely into the exact language of Apartheid. For Apartheid is Afrikaans for 'separateness', as racial segregation and institutionalized racial discrimination.

The 1967 occupation and the 'demographic threat' of all the Palestinians in that occupied territory do not pose the imminence of Apartheid - no, it already exists. What the occupation does threaten to do, is endanger Israel's PR: It will becomes more difficult for Israel to veil the Apartheid as a mere 'temporary' exigency, if the occupation is not 'temporary'.

Veiling Israeli Apartheid as 'democracy' was one the very first of the acts of Israel, as noted in the report, in the chapter titled 'Demographic engineering' (p. 31):

The first general policy of Israel has been one of demographic engineering, in order to establish and maintain an overwhelming Jewish majority in Israel. As in any racial democracy, such a majority allows the trappings of democracy — democratic elections, a strong legislature — without threatening any loss of hegemony by the dominant racial group. In Israeli discourse, this mission is expressed in terms of the so-called "demographic threat", an openly racist reference to Palestinian population growth or the return of Palestinian refugees.

And what ideology has informed and rationalized these practices? Zionism.

Read more

University Offers Racist Course on ‘the Problem of Whiteness’

Truth Revolt

Good news for those white people who have been wondering what they can do to resolve the damaging effects of their skin color on society: the University of Wisconsin will be offering a course next spring on the “Problem of Whiteness” which will attempt to offer solutions. The Washington Free Beacon notes that the course will explore institutional racism and “what it means to be #woke.” “Woke” is a grammatically annoying neologism that means socially enlightened. If, as a white person, you have your eyes opened to just how oppressive your skin color is and how you’re personally and racially responsible for all the problems of people of color, then congratulations, you are “woke.”

Read more

You're still crying wolf: Trump is "openly racist", "white supremacist", "literally Hitler" - No, he's not

Scott Alexander
Slate Star Codex

[Content warning: hate crimes, Trump, racism. I have turned off comments to keep out bad people who might be attracted by this sort of thing. Avoid sharing in places where this will attract the wrong kind of attention, as per your best judgment. Please don't interpret anything in this article to mean that Trump is not super terrible]

[Epistemic status: A reduction of a complicated issue to only 8000 words, because nobody would read it if it were longer. I think this is true but incomplete. I will try to discuss missing parts at more length later.]
I.

A New York Times article from last September that went viral only recently: Crying Wolf, Then Confronting Trump. It asks whether Democrats have "cried wolf" so many times that nobody believes them anymore. And so:

When "honorable and decent men" like McCain and Romney "are reflexively dubbed racists simply for opposing Democratic policies, the result is a G.O.P. electorate that doesn't listen to admonitions when the genuine article is in their midst".

I have a different perspective. Back in October 2015, I wrote that the picture of Trump as "the white power candidate" and "the first openly white supremacist candidate to have a shot at the Presidency in the modern era" was overblown. I said that "the media narrative that Trump is doing some kind of special appeal-to-white-voters voodoo is unsupported by any polling data", and predicted that:

If Trump were the Republican nominee, he could probably count on equal or greater support from minorities as Romney or McCain before him.

Now the votes are in, and Trump got greater support from minorities than Romney or McCain before him. You can read the Washington Post article, Trump Got More Votes From People Of Color Than Romney Did, or look at the raw data (source) 

Trump made gains among blacks. He made big among Latinos. He made gains among Asians. The only major racial group where he didn't get a gain of greater than 5% was white people. I want to repeat that: the group where Trump's message resonated least over what we would predict from a generic Republican was the white population.

Nor was there some surge in white turnout. I don't think we have official numbers yet, but by eyeballing what data we have it looks very much like whites turned out in equal or lesser numbers this year than in 2012, 2008, and so on.

[EDIT: though see here for an alternate perspective]

The media responded to all of this freely available data with articles like White Flight From Reality: Inside The Racist Panic That Fueled Donald Trump's Victory and Make No Mistake: Donald Trump's Win Represents A Racist "Whitelash".

I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he's "the candidate of the KKK" and "the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement" is made up. It's a catastrophic distraction from the dozens of other undeniable problems with Trump that could have convinced voters to abandon him. That it came to dominate the election cycle should be considered a horrifying indictment of our political discourse, in the same way that it would be a horrifying indictment of our political discourse if the entire Republican campaign had been based around the theory that Hillary Clinton was a secret Satanist. Yes, calling Romney a racist was crying wolf. But you are still crying wolf.

I avoided pushing this point any more since last October because I didn't want to look like I was supporting Trump, or accidentally convince anyone else to support Trump. But since we're past the point where that matters anymore, I want to present my case.

I realize that all of this is going to make me sound like a crazy person and put me completely at odds with every respectable thinker in the media, but luckily, being a crazy person at odds with every respectable thinker in the media has been a pretty good ticket to predictive accuracy lately, so whatever. 

Read more

'Black Lives Matter' Organizer "Triggered" By White People, Demands Money For Being A "Fat, Black Bitch"

Paul Joseph Watson
Zero Hedge

According to ‘Black Lives Matter’ organizer Ashleigh Shackelford, white people aren’t welcome at Black Lives Matter rallies and instead should just hand over “reparations” to black people so that they can purchase new cellphones and laptops.

In an article for ‘Wear Your Voice’, an “intersectional feminist media” outlet, Shackelford says that she finds the presence of white people at Black Lives Matter rallies “triggering,” and that black people are “frightened” by whites, adding that their roles should be confined to acting as human “buffers against the police”.

“Why are you going to a protest when you’re the oppressor?” asks Shackelford, adding, “WHITE PEOPLE ARE KILLING US. So when I see white people show up to rally excited and smiling, ready to march like it’s a hobby — I’m disgusted and absolutely fucking livid….I’m ready to fight.”

Decrying the fact that white people are promoting a message of love and unity in the spirit of Martin Luther King, Shackelford complains that, “White people are 400 years too fucking late for a round of applause for a damn tweet with a hashtag, or for showing up to a damn rally.”

She then pushes the demented dogma that white people living today owe blacks “reparations” for slavery (only 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves at the height of slavery).

“Nothing you have is yours. Let me be clear: Nothing you have is yours. Also, Let me be see through: Reparations are not donations, because we are not your charity, tax write off, or good deed for the day. You are living off of stolen resources, stolen land, exploited labor, appropriated culture and the murder of our people. Nothing you have is yours,” writes Shackelford.

Read more 

The murder of Sandra Bland and America's 'color revolution'

Joe Quinn
Sott.net

Sandra Bland. Remember the name, if you can. She's just the latest in a growing, publicly-known list of American citizens who have been either physically abused or murdered by US police for having the temerity to question their 'authority'.

On July 10th 2015, Sandra Bland had recently arrived in Prairie View, Waller County, Texas from Illinois to begin a new job at her alma mater, A&M University, a historically black school 40 miles northwest of Houston. Texas has been described as the most racist state in the USA, and Waller County the most racist county in Texas. Segregation there is a way of life, from the cradle to grave, literally; cemeteries in the county are divided between black and white, with significantly more money being spent on the upkeep of white cemeteries.

While driving in Prairie View that day, Waller County trooper Brian Encina, with nothing better to do than harass drivers for minor traffic "violations" that endanger no one, pulled Bland over for not signaling a lane change.

The police dash-cam video of the encounter shows that, from the get-go, Bland expressed her irritation at being stopped and fined for no good reason. She was, however, fully compliant with the officer to the extent she was required, giving him her license and registration when asked. Noticing her irritation, Encina disingenuously asked Bland "what's wrong?" This was Encina's first attempt to intimidate Bland, yet she wasn't in the mood to be cowed, and told him why she was irritated. The trooper made it clear that his question was not, in fact, sincere, by asking "are you done?" The defining moment in the encounter then occurred when Encina asked Bland to put out her cigarette. Bland refused, stating that it was her car and her right to smoke in it if she pleased and the trooper had no authority to demand otherwise. Two justified challenges to his power was all this jumped-up little authoritarian could take, and he demanded that Bland get out of her car. Bland continued to assert her rights by refusing and repeatedly asked why she was required to do so. 

Read more

How the Shock Doctrine is being applied to Greece

Comment: This is a very instructive piece from a couple of years ago...

----------------------------

Naomi Klein

EnetEnglish

April 2013 

 

According to bestselling author Naomi Klein, the systemic use of shock and fear by the power elites to undermine vulnerable communities is very much evident in post-bailout Greece. From the rise of racism to the sell-off of the country's oil and natural gas resources - much of what will shape Greece's immediate future are, she argues, predictable consequences of the politics of austerity.

Naomi Klein is the author of controversial New York Times bestseller The Shock Doctrine, which has been referred to as "the master narrative of our time". The book argues that business interests and powerful nations exploit shocks in the form of natural disasters, economic problems, or political turmoil, as an opportunity to aggressively restructure vulnerable countries' economies. She posits that because ultra-capitalistic policies are harmful to the majority of citizens, they cannot be implemented without a shock, ranging from media-hyped anxiety to police torture, that squashes popular resistance. In this exclusive interview, Klein explains to EnetEnglish how she believes the Shock Doctrine relates to Greece today.

How do events in Greece relate to your arguments in The Shock Doctrine?

To me it is a classic example of the things I wrote about. It's heartbreaking to see the same tricks and the same tactics being used so brutally. And there's been enormous resistance in Greece. It's particularly distressing to see the violent repression of the social movements that were resisting austerity. And it's just been going on for so long now. People get worn down.

What I've been following recently is the sell-off of natural resources for mining and drilling. That's the next frontier of how this is going to play out - the scramble for oil and gas in the Aegean. And it's going to affect Cyprus as well. This is a whole other level of using austerity and debt to force countries to sell off their mining and drilling rights for fire sale prices.

When you add the climate crisis on top of that it is particularly culpable that you have an economic crisis being used as leverage to extract more fossil fuels, especially because Greece itself very climate vulnerable. And I think its possible that, as the scramble for oil and gas heats up, there will be more resistance because it's a huge threat to Greece's economy  

Read more