Thursday, May 31, 2007

Being anonymous makes you brave.

Though I have to say, I appreciate the honesty of the comment below. I don't think I realized before that there are people who see racism this way: there's x amount of power, and we white people have got it, so if we try to change that, we'll be giving all the power to the people of color who hate us and only pretend to be our friends. Moreover, it doesn't matter if they're being oppressed, as long as we aren't. Why should we give up any advantage we have?

That's just sad. Maybe I'll have more to say about this later. Particularly about the implication that genocide is just fine, as long as whites aren't being killed. Except...though the comment is written in an even, reasonable tone, it smacks of white supremacist "logic" and rhetoric, particularly the suggestion of a coming race war. Which makes me simply want to share it, as it's important to know our enemy, so that my readers can note that Aryan Nation or whoever has learned some measure of subtlety.

And incidentally, as far as people who make such arguments as the one below are concerned, I'm not really a white person. I mean, I am - I totally have white privilege. But under the terms of the Wannsee Conference, the Nazis would have thrown me into the camps along with everyone else, and I'm pretty sure no white supremacist would want me, either. Which is fine with me.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Anti-racism, race traitors, and whiteness.":

I am white. Why should I support 'anti-racism'? By definition, its only purpose is to disadvantage white people. Now you may argue that 'white skin privilege' is unearned and unfair and thus we should work to abolish it, even if it does disadvantage us. To that I can only ask, why? Do you really believe if the tables were turned and instead of 'white skin privilege' there existed 'dark skin privilege' that those with dark skin would be falling all over themselves to purge their society of the advantages it afforded them? I don't believe that.

Some may argue that even if we could not expect such moral reciprocity were situations reversed that we should press on to abolish 'white privilege' regardless, because it's the right thing to do. Again, I must ask why? Is it supposed to result in the making of a better world? Let's consider the example of South Africa. I cannot think of a nation in which the white population has proceeded further or faster with the abolishment of their 'white skin privilege'. What has been the end result? What was once the most modern nation in Africa has been reduced to a violent, corrupt hell hole. Crime is so bad that the nation had been referred to as both the rape and murder capital of the world. A great deal of this violence is directed against the dwindling white population by the black population. Such is the extent of the anti-white violence that Genocide Watch has stated that the actions of the blacks are warning signs of the beginning of a genocide against whites in the country. See here:

http://www.genocidewatch.org/BoersSlain01.htm

Have the anti-racist actions of the white South Africans to dispel their 'white skin privilege' resulted in a better world? It certainly hasn't for them. Far from creating harmony and peace, the actions the whites took to disempower themselves left them vulnerable and essentially defenseless in the face of the violence now directed at them by blacks who utterly hate them. Many of the white South Africans have realized what a mistake they made in surrendering their 'white skin privilege' and agreeing to live under the rulership of an ethnic group that wants to commit genocide against them. Unfortunately, for them, it's too late. Why, as a sane white person, would I want to put myself in the same position these white South Africans have? There is no reason. There is absolutely no reason a sane person would want to submit themselves to the power of a group with such hostility toward them as the black South Africans have toward the white South Africans. There is no reason at all - the very notion is insane.

The experience of the white South Africans is hardly unique. Nearly anywhere in the world where whites are a minority they are treated with contempt and hostility by the non-white majority. If you are white and doubt this, I invite you to take a trip - unescorted - thorough one of the 'minority' neighborhoods of your nearest large city. Or, better yet, why don't you go for a short vacation to some nation in South America, or Africa - and don't just stay in the tourist areas. To get the full experience you need to really meet the natives. Another wonderful place to visit would be nearly any of the nations of the Islamic world. Again, don't just stick to the tamed tourist zones, you want to experience the real culture. Most of you would be quite hesitant to do any of these things because you know to be true what I have been saying all along - most of these people *hate* you. As the white South Africans learned, no amount of anti-racist action on your part is going to make them hate you any less. The only thing your anti-racist activities can do is to serve to make you more vulnerable to their hate. Why would any sane human being want that? I certainly don't.

There may be some of you reading this who believe that whites are so evil and have such a history of oppressive behavior that they deserve to be hated and mistreated. There may actually be some of you reading this right now who feel that the world can only move forward once the corpse of the 'white race' has been cast into humanities collective ditch. Sure, you may think to yourselves, the dismantling of the white race may be violent and unfair to many but the overall good it will do will outweigh any such considerations. I've seen similar things written before, and I have no doubt that some of you share this view. I cannot hope to dissuade those so warped from such insane beliefs. Anyone white person who thinks that way is so consumed with pathological self hatred that reason is utterly lost on them. I can only say that your anti-white 'partners' in anti-racism will see that you are properly rewarded for your activities.

As for the rest of the people reading this - normal, sane people who don't hate themselves and don't want to submit themselves to the governance of groups that despise them - you need to ask yourself why in the hell you support this sort of a movement. It will not help you in the short run or in the long run. Helping to empower those who hate you while disempowering yourself is nothing less than cutting your own throat. Why do it? Those you are 'helping' sure as hell wouldn't do the same for you. Wake up, before it's too late.

31 comments:

Veronica said...

jeeezus. did someone link to you from stormfront?

Danielle's Daily life said...

Yeah, it's all a big conspiracy (eye roll)

"If you are white and doubt this, I invite you to take a trip - unescorted - thorough one of the 'minority' neighborhoods of your nearest large city."

I used to live in a "minority neighborhood" in Southwest Houston. Nothing ever happened to me, in fact I was friendly with all of my neighbors.

Pf, what are you that you aren't technically white? I am Greek, and I hate that we are still considered white.

Sassywho said...

oh that guy sounds like he be the life of the party.

again, let's talk about projection and anxiety of losing privilege.

zoloft should be the new whining white guy pill. do you suffer from waning privilege anxiety? does the world seem a little more hostile to your god-given rights? theres a pill that can help.

plain(s)feminist said...

Veronica - I don't know. I'll have to check. I don't know what stormfront is.

Danielle - I'm "technically white," but I'm of Jewish descent and I'm bisexual. So, that puts me in the undesireable category, and it separates me from the "pure" Aryan "race."

I also get mistaken for Asian Indian from time to time, which is interesting because when that happens, it is always Asian Indians who mistakenly identify me. No one else thinks I look Indian.

This whole question of what whiteness is is a lot like the question of what porn is. It's frequently in the eye of the beholder. Some day I'm going to write about the degrees of whiteness within the "white community"...

Veronica said...

Stormfront is the big white supremacist community on the web. I highly recommend NOT looking it up, unless you wanna lose your lunch.

Renegade Evolution said...

PF:

"This whole question of what whiteness is is a lot like the question of what porn is. It's frequently in the eye of the beholder. Some day I'm going to write about the degrees of whiteness within the "white community"... "

Ohhh, I will be looking for that one...as a kinda white rather ambigious type myself.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for responding to my comment. When I wrote it, I thought it would simply be buried in your blog archives and never see much exposure. Perhaps now it will serve as a catalyst to facilitate an open and honest discussion of the stake white people have in the anti-racism movement. This is a subject that I believe no white anti-racist can think too much about.

I notice that you did not attempt to address the core of my argument. Why should whites support the empowerment of groups that hate them? Why should whites disadvantage themselves to serve the interests of non-white groups who are very often violently hostile to whites? You didn't address the issue because, as I said before, there is no reason a sane person would do such a thing. There is no way that a normal, reasonable person would choose to subordinate themselves to the power of a group or groups that are hateful toward them. To do such a thing is insane and any honest person must admit that. Your silence on this issue is a tacit admission of the truth of my core point and I thank you for it.

I am not surprised that you chose to misrepresent my position rather than address it directly. By choosing to mischaracterize me as a 'white supremacist' and by falsely stating that I somehow support genocide you plainly reveal the intellectual barrenness of your position. No reasonable person reading my comment would come away with the impressions you are trying to create. As for your mention of a 'race war', I can only assume you are referring to my discussion of the horrific violence being perpetrated against white South Africans by black South Africans. This is not some sort of fantasy that I concocted, it is a fact of reality that any person can easily verify at their leisure.

I find it very interesting that you, and so many of your posters, have identified themselves as non-white. I think more whites in the anti-racism movement should be made aware that many activists in this community don't identify themselves as white, even though they may look white and even 'pass' for white socially. I think it would be beneficial for white anti-racist activists to understand just how many of those calling for the 'dismantling' of the white race don't even identify as a part of it.

I can certainly understand why those who clearly identify themselves as non-white should like to see whites disempowerd. Such a transfer of power would unmistakably be in the interests of non-whites. I have never doubted that. What I have said all along, and what no reasonable person can deny, is that such a change is clearly *not* in the interests of whites. In fact, such a societal change is clearly contrary to the interests of white people and there is no reason for a sane white person to support what effectively amounts to their own displacement and subjugation. Why should whites disempower themselves in an effort to empower those who are hostile and hateful toward them? There is no reason what-so-ever for a sane person to do such a thing. It makes no sense at all. It's crazy.

I see that you are attempting to infer that by posting anonymously that I am somehow cowardly. Well - I don't see you posting under your real name, either. Why is that? Pot. Kettle. Black.

In closing, I would like to again thank you for providing me with the opportunity to engage in this stimulating discourse. It is clear that we have very dissimilar views on this subject, but I hope that our idealogical differences won't impede the development of an open and honest dialog on the subject of the stake of whites in the anti-racism movement.

Drek said...

As for the rest of the people reading this - normal, sane people who don't hate themselves and don't want to submit themselves to the governance of groups that despise them - you need to ask yourself why in the hell you support this sort of a movement.

I'm white. I mean really white. We're talking Central/Eastern European descent white here. Were it not for the fact that I tan like a champ, I would be semi-transparent I'm so white. I'm also male. Very male. I like women sexually. I have no sexual interest in other males. None. I am a heterosexual white male or, as I like to think of it, The Man.

I support efforts to eliminate sexism and racism because I think it's criminally stupid for a species to simply throw away so much potential. We have major threats facing the continued existence of homo sapiens: environmental degradation, overpopulation, resource overconsumption, and so on. Do we really think that there are no minds in bodies with ovaries or black skin that can help solve these problems? Do we really think that white people and, possibly, white men are the only source of good ideas? We all survive together or we all die together- it's as simple as that. I will grant that I do not believe that all people are created equal, but I don't think race, sex, or sexual orientiation has anything to do with it.

Anonymous, before you ask why Plain(s)feminist didn't address your "point" about giving power to those who hate you, perhaps we should dispense with the strawman? The point is to alter society so that different racial groups don't hate each other any longer and that none are disempowered- and yes, those two things ARE related. When someone is stepping on your neck, you rarely feel generously towards them.

By all means, make your argument- but at least have the courtesy to object to an argument someone is actually making.

plain(s)feminist said...

Come on now, Anonymous. We both know that you can recognize the difference between posting as "anonymous" and posting consistently, on one's own blog and on others', with the same psuedonym.

I think Drek did an excellent job of responding to your claims, so there's little left for me to add.

I will say this, though, since you've missed it: I am white. My birth certificate says white. The U.S. government considers me to be a white person. At any moment, my friends Lara and Sally Sunshine are going to jump on here to point out that, indeed, Plain(s) is a white girl. And even if I decided that, from now on, I would tell everyone I met that I wasn't white and would actively reject the identity of "white" (what the hell is a white identity, anyway? does it mean I watch NASCAR or that I go yachting? ~scratching my head in disbelief~), I would still receive the same old white privilege that I receive everyday - I would still not get followed around in stores by clerks who assume I'm there to shoplift, I would still not inspire little old white ladies to clutch their purses, I would still not have to worry that my race would prevent me from being hired or allowed to rent or buy a home, I would still not worry that people would immediately assume that English was not my first language or that I was a first-generation immigrant or that I was on welfare or that I was a criminal, and I would still not have to worry that I would be called "nigger" or some other racist slur while walking down the street minding my own business.

My point, Anonymous, when I said I'm not really a white person, was that you, and others like you (you've pretty clearly articulated a white supremacist position, despite your protests), probably would not consider me white enough to suit your purposes. From a white supremacist's perspective, I very likely don't count. I very likely am on the other side.

Just as you, yourself, may not be as "white" as you think you are.

belledame222 said...

It isn't "supporting groups who hate 'us'," even assuming we did belong to the same 'us' (like PF, I assume no such thing, for similar reasons). It's about -doing unto others.- You don't continue to treat people like shit out of fear that if you let up, they'll take revenge. It's wrong, but also: it's stupid. Treat people like human beings and generally they respond like human beings. Yeah, there might be anger to work through, but you know what: adults find ways of dealing with that.

Treat people like wild animals or monsters and they'll respond that way, too.

And sooner or later, inevitably, the monster will get out.

Personally, I'd rather deal with the people.

belledame222 said...

and by the way, I live in one of the most ethnically diverse-"minority," if you like"-- neighborhoods around, in a large city. Strangely enough we mostly manage to get along without killing each other. They're not savages. They're my friends and neighbors, capsice?

Cassandra Says said...

I liked Drek's response, but there's an even simpler, more idiot-proof way to explain things.

Some people are not entirely selfish. Some of us actually think that "well I'm OK, so who cares about anyone else?" is not a morally or ethicially acceptable position to take.

PF - I found your comment that you're identified as non-white, but not by white people, interesting because the same thing happens to me all the time. Technically I'm Celt, and maybe a little Pict (Scottish with some Welsh ancestry and a mysterious foundling grandfather whose ethnicity nobody is sure about). I have been mistaken for, as follows...
Persian, Spanish, Hispanic, Greek, Jewish, Arab, Turkish, Russian (that one confuses me, maybe they think I'm of Central Asian descent or Georgian or something), Central European (usually Czech or Hungarian), Indian and Italian. Are Greek, Spanish and/or Italian people considered "white" by white supremacists? I'm not really sure, since I tend to develop selective deafness whenever anyone starts spouting racist crap.
On every occasion on which I've been misidentified as belonging to an ethnic group that I don't belong to (or maybe I do - who knows what my grandfather's ethnicity was?) it has been members of the group in question who identified me as such. Ye olde generic white folks always identify me as white. I've always been kind of curious as to why that happens. The only explanation I've ever come up with is that it seems to happen mostly when I'm in environments where the ethnicity I'm being mistaken for is the default - for example, I'm in a Persian or Indian grocery store, or a Russian deli, or a taqueria, or whatever. Maybe people are so used to white/anglo folks avoiding environments that are predominantly non-white/non-anglo that they assume that anyone who is wandering around who doesn't look uncomfortable or like they just got lost must belong to the majority group?
I've always kind of liked the fact that people find it hard to pin down my ethnicity. From a selfish point of view it makes it easier for me to wander around to places that I want to go (it certainly makes travelling a lot easier), and it seems to make people a lot friendlier towards me than they might otherwise be. The only disadvantage is that people assume that I speak languages that I actually don't speak and occasionally get irritated with me when I am unable to respond in the same language.

I do find it VERY interesting how quickly our anonymous buddy defaulted to "see, you anti-racist people aren't REALLY white". Who counts as "white enough" for people like that? Is it anglo only?
It's a perfect illustration of why white supremacists are the people we should all really be afraid of.

Cassandra Says said...

Also, as to the point about South Africa...
Dude, do you really not think that the historical context might be worth looking at in that situation? If black South Africans do hate white South Africans, do you think that hatred just sprang out of thin air? And don't you think the continuing economic disparity and widespread povery might have some impact on crime rates?

plain(s)feminist said...

Thanks, BD - you reminded me to point out that one of the reasons that Anonymous' post would be so patently ridiculous - if it weren't so creepy - is that it's clearly been written by a white person who has had limited (if any)relationships with POC. Thus, the whole post is motivated by fear and stereotype.

Cassandra Says said...

Also, I'm with Belle - when I was in London I lived in Finsbury Park, a few miles from what's probably the largest mosque in Europe (and then center of Islamic radicalism in the UK). Majority population? There wasn't one, really, it was pretty evenly split between Arab, Irish and Black (both Carribean and African -there's a huge Cameroonian community in the next neighborhood over). OK, so some of the Arab people assumed I was Arab, but the people who were black definately didn't assume I was black, and yet nobody from that part of the community was ever hostile or unfriendly to me. The only people who ever gave me any shit? They were all Irish.

A couple of years later I lived right next to Brixton and walked right through the African market to get to school every day (and stopped off there to buy vegetables). Oddly enough no one tried to kill me. Or my Jewish boyfriend who worked in an African fabric store right in the middle of the market, and he didn't exactly blend in, what with being 6ft 5 and pasty as hell with really long hair. Funny, that.

plain(s)feminist said...

Some people are not entirely selfish. Some of us actually think that "well I'm OK, so who cares about anyone else?" is not a morally or ethicially acceptable position to take.

That's it, exactly.

Are Greek, Spanish and/or Italian people considered "white" by white supremacists?

Technically, I believe all three groups are considered Caucasian. At some point in the 20th century, Mexicans as a group were placed in a separate category on the U.S. decennial census; on the next decennial census, after pressure from the Mexican Gov't (which was angry that the U.S. would determine Mexicans "not white"), that listing was removed, leaving Mexicans absorbed under the White category. The current decennial census, I believe, does not list "Hispanic" under race, but rather has a separate question so that a person can check either the "Hispanic, White" or "Hispanic, non-White" category, which is bizarre as "Latino" (which is what Hispanic is really meant to measure, I think) is a multicultural category already.

Italians, Hungarians, Irish, and Jews were not considered to be white when they first came to the U.S.

And to make it even more confusing, the groups that are socially recognized as white are not necessarily the same as the ones that are legally or "scientifically" recognized as white. For instance, people of Middle Eastern descent are probably not considered to be white by most Americans. (For a really interesting history of legal racial classification, read Ian Haney Lopez' book, White by Law.)

When it comes to white supremacists, I think they determine whiteness based not only on popular opinion/general consensus but specifically on skin color, hair type, and facial features (whether or not someone "looks" white); religious affiliation (Christians are ok, Jews and Muslims and most other groups are not); sexual orientation (straights only); marriage/kids (this is where white folks married to POC and/or parents of POC become race traitors, as Heart pointed out a while back - white supremacist literature basically offers the same message that Anony did - "wake up before it's too late" - because "too late" is when there is a race war and the white supremacists kill everyone who isn't on their side).

Ye olde generic white folks always identify me as white. I've always been kind of curious as to why that happens.

I think some of that is because white people often don't notice subtle differences within "whiteness", whereas Black people, for example, are used to seeing many gradations of skin tone, hair texture, and so on as part of "Blackness." When you reach a certain critical mass of "of colorness," then the whites notice. Until then, they assume everyone is white like they are.

I do find it VERY interesting how quickly our anonymous buddy defaulted to "see, you anti-racist people aren't REALLY white". Who counts as "white enough" for people like that? Is it anglo only?
It's a perfect illustration of why white supremacists are the people we should all really be afraid of.


Yes, absolutely - I found that interesting, as well.

Also, as to the point about South Africa...
Dude, do you really not think that the historical context might be worth looking at in that situation? If black South Africans do hate white South Africans, do you think that hatred just sprang out of thin air? And don't you think the continuing economic disparity and widespread povery might have some impact on crime rates?


Yeah, what she said!!

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 1/9)

It amazes me the number of assumptions people here are so quick to make. Assumptions based in biases of what people believe that someone who doesn't think like them must believe, feel and represent. Biased assumptions made by people who claim to know better, people who preach to others about the evil of such behavior. The many dogmas of anti-racism are showing themselves quite clearly. One thing though - they never become true no matter how often they're chanted. Reality will always win out over lies and naivety.

No matter how much others here mischaracterize my statements, falsely accuse me of positions I do not hold, lie, or resort to any other such tactic, they do nothing but demonstrate the complete inability of the anti-racist position to deal with my central point. There is no reason for sane white people to disempower themselves in order to help groups who clearly have much hate for them. It is insane. This is true and cannot be denied. I think that's why so many here are so focused on avoiding that little issue entirely and have reverted to simply unthinkingly repeating the dogmas they have had drilled into their heads by the anti-racist movement. Ignoring or misrepresenting my point doesn't make it go away, or make it any less true.

I am no racist. Contrary to prevailing opinion among the posters here, opposing the anti-racist movement does not make one a racist. Opposing the anti-racist movement has little to do with racism. Rather, it has everything to do with common sense, self respect and human decency.

One poster said that the goal of anti-racism is "to alter society so that different racial groups don't hate each other any longer and that none are disempowered." That may very well be what anti-racism means to many of you. I can fully understand how incredulous you would be toward me for not supporting such a laudable goal. The problem is that the end result of anti-racism is anything but what the previous description presents.

Anti-racism has but one goal - the empowerment of non-white peoples. One of the most important ways in which this goal is pursued is in efforts to disempower whites. That the anti-racists have as their goal the empowerment of disempowered people shows that they fully realize that being disempowered is harmful and undesirable for any group. Despite this fact, they actively work to disempower white people. The anti-racists actively work to do that which is harmful and undesirable to whites. The anti-racists actively work to do to whites that which they would not want to be done to non-whites, they seek to disempower and disadvantage them. The reasons are irrelevant, the fact still remains that the anti-racist movement means to do whites harm as one of its primary goals.

(multi-part post, part 1/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 2/9)

The anti-racist movement does far worse than simply disempowering and disadvantaging whites. It works actively to empower and advantage groups and peoples who are strongly hostile and even hateful toward white people. Many non-white so called 'minority' groups have powerful undercurrents of anti-white hatred as a part of their culture. Don't believe me? Let's take a brief look at just a tiny, *tiny* sampling of the supporting evidence:

HIGH PROFILE INCIDENTS:

Duke Rape Case - I'm sure you're all familiar with this case by now. It was a clear case of an out of control prosecutor fueled by a desire to pander to a community that hated whites and wanted to see them punished. These men committed no crime and have been fully exonerated and have even received apologies from most of the agencies involved. Despite their innocence and a complete lack of evidence against them, they were attacked and maligned in the media by people that hate whites (especially white men). Even now, after the whole scandal has ended, there are white hating people out there who insist these men are guilty and must be punished for their grievous sin of being white and male. This case shows that there is a good deal of hatred toward whites (especially white males) in the black community.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Knoxville Murders - This case has received some publicity lately but let's sum it up for those who may not have heard about it. Five monstrous criminals kidnapped, tortured, raped and murdered Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom. The woman, Channon Christian, was mutilated (at the very least had one of her breasts cut off) and urinated on while she was still alive. Because the beasts that committed this atrocity were black, the details were kept quiet by the media for fear of inciting 'racial hatred' in whites. Despite efforts made to suppress the story (some even regarded it as an urban legend), word of it got out and it has become quite a hot topic of debate and discussion concerning the problem of black on white crime. If this case doesn't clearly demonstrate anti-white hatred by blacks, then nothing does. Because of the outcry that resulted from the publics increasing awareness of this horrible crime, efforts have been made to some how insinuate that the terrors inflicted on the victims weren't as bad as they first appeared. Such shameless lying and political spin cannot suppress the truth now that it is out. That these 5 hateful monsters deliberately chose 2 whites to be the victims of their brutality is certainly an act of profound hatred, and further evidence of the hatred that many blacks harbor toward whites.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4

Long Beach Beating - Yet another travesty that perfectly exemplifies the unchecked hatred that exists in many black communities toward white people. For those unfamiliar with the story, 3 white girls in Long Beach were brutally attacked by a large crowd of blacks (between 25 and 40) yelling things such as "We hate white people, fuck whites!" and "White bitches!" The girls were beaten, kicked and hit over the head with a skateboard. They were pummeled into unconsciousness and suffered multiple injuries, including facial fractures and multiple contusions. If not for the intervention of a black man who stopped the attack, they would all likely have been killed. This story clearly shows that not all blacks have to be filled with hate for the anti-white hatred prevalent in the black community to cause harm. Some of the perpetrators were eventually caught. Although they were initially charged with felony hate crimes the judge and DA though that it would be OK to drop some of the charges and let them off with probation and counseling. The victims are afraid to go on with their previous lives as they fear retaliation from friends of their attackers. That an entire gang of between 25 and 40 blacks decided to viciously attack these girls shows that there is, indeed, a great deal of anti-white hatred in the black community.

Sources: 1, 2, 3

OJ Simpson Trial - This case was a real dividing point in American culture both while it was going on and after the verdict. The evidence against Simpson in this case was overwhelming, but the issue that ended up being tried in court wasn't whether OJ Simpson was a murderer, but rather did he deserve to get off because the 'system' was racist. A jury, of whom only one member was white, decided that the system was guilty and thus OJ should go free. Simpson was acquitted of murder despite all the evidence. Some of the jurors even admitted that they thought he was guilty, but let him go anyway. This case is important because it showed in a very public way that blacks are willing to render verdicts based upon racial politics instead of evidence, facts or justice. It wasn't only the non-whites on the jury who believed OJ should go free, the vast majority of black Americans shared that opinion. That black Americans overwhelmingly wanted this murderer to go free shows that a strong current of anti-white hatred exists in the black community. Read more here.

(multi-part post, part 2/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 3/9)

The anti-racist movement does far worse than simply disempowering and disadvantaging whites. It works actively to empower and advantage groups and peoples who are strongly hostile and even hateful toward white people. Many non-white so called 'minority' groups have powerful undercurrents of anti-white hatred as a part of their culture. Don't believe me? Let's take a brief look at just a tiny, *tiny* sampling of the supporting evidence:

ANTI-WHITE HATE ORGANIZATIONS:

Aztlan , Mexica-Movement and La Raza Unida - These are all examples of Latino nationalist organizations who believe that the American southwest (and perhaps even the entire North American continent) belongs to them. They make no jokes about the fact that they intend to take the land back from the evil whites by any means necessary - including force. In fact, Jose Angel Gutierrez, the founder of La Raza Unida, has been quoted as saying "We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him." Quote source here. These views represent a radical and organized hatred toward whites. These organizations are popular among many in the Latino community which shows that this hatred is not isolated among a few radicals, but instead is wide spread among the general Latino population.

The Nation of Islam - This movement, run by Louis Farrakhan, is virulently anti-white and anti-semitic. Louis Farrakhan is insane and teaches that whites are devils and that Jews are 'false Jews'. Despite the hate pouring from this organization and its leader, it is very popular in the black community. Remember the Million Man March? That Louis Farrakhan and The Nation of Islam continue to be so well respected among blacks shows that there exists considerable hatred against whites in the black community.

The Black Panther Party - This notorious party has long espoused many forms of anti-white hatred. The early party was composed of almost entirely of violent, white hating criminals. Examples of party 'luminaries' include: Co-founders Bobby Seale and Huey Newton - both of whom are murderers, as well as Eldridge Cleaver who advocated raping white women as an act of insurrection against the white establishment. The party was founded on anti-white hate. Its continued popularity among the black community shows that there is a great deal of hatred toward whites among blacks.

Yahweh ben Yahweh - This website belongs to a cult started by a violent, depraved, white hating, anti-semitic, black lunatic named Hulon Mitchell. He believed that he was the son of god (hence the name change to Yahweh ben Yahweh) and that black people were the true Hebrews. He required those wanting to join the innermost circle of his organization to kill white people and bring to him some part of the victims body. Despite the fact that this man was a blood thirsty psychopath, his teachings live on in the black community and many blacks subscribe to some form of black Israelitism. As the official website is so incoherent, I direct you to this Crime Library article on the subject of Yahweh ben Yahweh and his crimes for more information. The fact that this movement, and related movements, continue to thrive in the black community demonstrates that a tremendous amount of anti-white hate exists in black culture.

Al Arabiya and Al Jazeera - These are both prominent news sources in the Muslim world. Why am I listing these among these other hate sites? Because they broadcast a continual stream of anti-Western, anti-white, and anti-semitic hatred to their viewers. Both stations have broadcast denials that Muslims were responsible for the 9-11 attacks, claiming that they were perpetrated by Jews or by Americans. They have also aired broadcasts referring to the 9-11 terrorists as 'the magnificent 19'. Some hate organizations are well polished and professional, but they are still filled with anti-white hate. These hateful news outlets are also very popular in the Muslim world, showing that there exists a large amount of anti-white, anti-Western hate among Muslims.

(multi-part post, part 3/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 4/9)

The anti-racist movement does far worse than simply disempowering and disadvantaging whites. It works actively to empower and advantage groups and peoples who are strongly hostile and even hateful toward white people. Many non-white so called 'minority' groups have powerful undercurrents of anti-white hatred as a part of their culture. Don't believe me? Let's take a brief look at just a tiny, *tiny* sampling of the supporting evidence:

PERSONAL STORIES:

Where I work is very diverse, with better than 40% of the workforce being composed of 'minorities'. Many of the 'minorities' I work with are good people, but certainly not all. I'm not here to point out the fact that there exist bad people in 'minority' groups. There exist bad people in any group. I, instead, am going to point out how much anti-white hate exists among members of 'minority' groups - even among people who some might think would know better. I have had many experiences with 'minorities' in which I have been treated in a bigoted or discriminatory manner, but I don't want to talk about those. I want to talk about 2 experiences I had with members of 'minority' groups with whom I am friendly and have had no difficulties with at all.

The first experience is one I had with a black co-worker who is a well educated, intelligent, and articulate manager in a different part of my department. I stopped by his office to talk about something to find him and a friend of his, who is also black and a police officer, talking about something else. I walked in to hear my co-workers friend telling my co-worker about how blacks were the true Jews. This is how I first learned about black Israelitism. My co-workers friend continued to talk while I was there, explaining how blacks were God and some other crazy stuff. He also drew some things on my co-workers white board that were supposed to symbolize the energy of the sun. I was stunned. I could not believe this. My co-worker was eating it up. I was uncomfortable and excused myself. When I came back later the drawings were still on the white board but my co-worker made no mention of his previous conversation.

The second experience happened at lunch when I asked a Latino co-worker if he had heard of Aztlan. This man is a clean cut professional who makes good money. I had just recently heard of Aztlan myself and wanted to see what he thought of it. He told me they were crazy and that I shouldn't pay any attention to them. If I would have dropped the subject then I would have missed out on what happened next. Instead of moving on to a different subject I told him that I thought they were crazy too and that Mexicans had no right to 'reclaim' American land. He very adamantly told me I was wrong. He explained to me how that land really belonged to Mexico and to the Mexican people and that I had been brainwashed to think that it was OK for Anglos to have that land. I said nothing else about Aztlan to him after that. What can you say to something like that?

I don't think that there is much value in giving personal testimony when trying to make a point in a debate. This is especially true in anonymous discussions on the web. However, I felt it necessary as there were some here who arrogantly insisted that I have had no contact with 'minorities' and that all my beliefs have arisen out of some sort of vacuum. That just isn't true. I have probably had more dealings - both good and bad - with 'minorities' than any overly privileged academic from South Dakota will have in a 1000 life times.

(multi-part post, part 4/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 5/9)

The anti-racist movement does far worse than simply disempowering and disadvantaging whites. It works actively to empower and advantage groups and peoples who are strongly hostile and even hateful toward white people. Many non-white so called 'minority' groups have powerful undercurrents of anti-white hatred as a part of their culture. Don't believe me? Let's take a brief look at just a tiny, *tiny* sampling of the supporting evidence:

STATISTICAL EVIDENCE:

FBI hate crime statistics tell and interesting tale. Before discussing them, it is important to note a few things about the way the FBI categorizes the racial groups of perpetrators and victims of hate crimes. The FBI considers 'Hispanic Origin' to be an ethnicity and not a racial category. This means that most offenders of 'Hispanic Origin' (Latinos) are categorized as whites. The FBI does not publish statistics tracking the ethnicity of offenders so it is impossible to even begin to guess how many offenders labeled by the FBI as white are actually Latino. The FBI *does* publish statistics on the ethnicity of victims, however. Interesting, isn't it.

Even with such slanted reporting, the statistics published by the FBI show that whites are underrepresented as offenders. According to the CIA, who also consider Latinos to be white, whites make up approximately 81% of the population. However, the FBI reports that they only make up 60% of hate crime offenders. Conversely, blacks who make up 13% of the population represent 20% of hate crime offenders. With such statistics, it isn't much of a stretch to say that there is a disproportionate level of hate in the black community.

In terms of of the race of the victims of hate crimes, we find that blacks make up the large majority. This, I am sure, surprises no one here. What may surprise you to learn is that whites are the second most victimized racial category, constituting 20% of the victims of racially motivated bias crimes according to FBI statistics for 2005. There is plenty of hate out there in 'minority' communities and a great deal of it is directed at white people. This cannot be denied and it should not be forgotten.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4

That was just a taste of the evidence of the anti-white hatred that exists in the cultures of many non-whites. Anyone who denies that such hatred exists or that it exerts a powerful influence on the cultures of many non-white groups is either deliberately lying, or completely divorced from reality. I'm not interested in any proclamations that not all 'minorities' are filled with such animosity. I am well aware of that fact. I have met and deal regularly with such people. But the fact remains that anti-white hatred is a powerful part of many non-white cultures. I'm also not interested in excuses or rationalizations for this hate, so don't bother offering them. To excuse this hatred is to justify it, and any white person who thinks that whites deserve to be the object of such hate is quite likely so filled with self hatred as to be beyond the reach of reason.

(multi-part post, part 5/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 6/9)

Now, it doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to understand that if group A hates group B that group A will hurt group B if it gets the chance. Note that it is not necessary for all - or even most - members of group A to be hateful toward group B, it is only necessary for there to be a significant amount of hate. If that condition is met, then if group A is in a position of power over group B it is certain that members of group A will use their power to abuse group B. Let's look at a small handful of examples of what happens when cultures with large amounts of anti-white hatred are empowered in real world:

RHODESIA:

Those who don't know the history of Rhodesia should read a little bit about it. It was an African state that had a white minority that comprised the ruling class and a large, angry black majority that wanted the whites out. The whites of this country (who were isolated from international support through various sanctions) fought a long, protracted war against the Marxist blacks, who received considerable international support, and they lost. After they lost control of their country they were subject to a horrific campaign of violence and murder. There are very few whites left in Rhodesia, what is today called Zimbabwe, most have either fled or been killed. Some people maintain that if the whites would have negotiated up front, instead of fighting a war, that things would have turned out differently for them. Such naivety is exposed as foolish when one considers the history of South Africa, where whites surrendered power without a fight only to share a very similar fate. Read this for more information.

SOUTH AFRICA:

I've already brought up South Africa in previous posts. It's an important issue that any white anti-racist should be aware of. This is a wonderful example of what happened when white anti-racism was allowed to run full course. White South Africans totally disempowered themselves in order to empower and appease the black South Africans. They were repaid with an unrelenting assault of hatred, rape and murder. This is what happens when people are foolish enough to empower those who hate them. It makes no sense. It is insane.

Sources: 1, 2

(multi-part post, part 6/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 7/9)

Now, it doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to understand that if group A hates group B that group A will hurt group B if it gets the chance. Note that it is not necessary for all - or even most - members of group A to be hateful toward group B, it is only necessary for there to be a significant amount of hate. If that condition is met, then if group A is in a position of power over group B it is certain that members of group A will use their power to abuse group B. Let's look at a small handful of examples of what happens when cultures with large amounts of anti-white hatred are empowered in real world:

UNITED STATES:

The demographics of the American southwest has changed tremendously in the past 35+ years. In 1970 California had a population that was 76% non-Hispanic white, Texas 70% non-Hispanic white, New Mexico 54% non-Hispanic white, and Arizona 74% non-Hispanic white. In 2005 California had a population that was 43% non-Hispanic white, Texas 49% non-Hispanic white, New Mexico 43% non-Hispanic white, and Arizona 60% non-Hispanic white. Obviously, these numbers don't count illegal immigrants which would make the non-white Hispanic population an even smaller percentage of the total. These numbers represent *tremendous* demographic change with few historical parallels. Very seldom has an indigenous population been overwhelmed to such an extent outside of a conquest or invasion.

The indigenous white Anglo population is being supplanted in much of the southwest by Latino 'immigrants'. As I have shown previously, there exist widely popular movements in the Latino community that claim that the American southwest belongs to them. These movements are openly hostile and antagonistic toward white Anglos whom they regard as invaders in their land. These Latino 'reconquista' movements promise that one day, the American southwest will belong to them. It looks as though they are right.

Latino immigrants have brought with them more than a militant desire to reclaim land that they believe to be rightfully theirs. They have also brought with them crime, poverty, and a culture that has little interest in integrating with that of the white Anglos. Where Latinos have become the majority, white Anglo culture is kicked to the wayside as Latinos establish a new order for and by themselves. White Anglos often emigrate to escape the hostile living conditions created by the new majority, and those who remain are forced to adapt to the violence and antagonism that becomes a part of their daily lives.

Latinos have been aided in their efforts by many white Anglo useful idiots. Those white Anglo idiots on the so called left believe Latinos to be a wonderful source of votes and political power for them. White Anglo idiots on the so called right believe that they can exploit the Latinos as a source of cheap labor to increase their quarterly profits. Both groups of white Anglos arrogantly and foolishly believe that they can 'tame' or 'control' their Latino pets. Latinos have no long term interest in voting Democrat or in working for minimum wage. They want their own land in which they intend to chart their own destiny. White Anglo politicians and business leaders in the border states are already becoming aware of this fact, as they learn that they are no longer calling the shots and must begin to play by the Latinos rules.

Much of the American southwest is now American in name only. It really belongs to Latinos who believe that the land is theirs and had the courage to walk across the border and take it. White Anglo culture and populations are both in sharp decline in the border states and neither will be making any resurgence. In fact, due to differences in birth rates between white Anglos and Latinos, it is quite likely that white Anglos and their culture will be further dispossessed by Latinos in the future. By empowering and enabling Latino immigrants, white Anglos have essentially ceded control of much of the country to a culture that has little use for them.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

(multi-part post, part 7/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 8/9)

Now, it doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to understand that if group A hates group B that group A will hurt group B if it gets the chance. Note that it is not necessary for all - or even most - members of group A to be hateful toward group B, it is only necessary for there to be a significant amount of hate. If that condition is met, then if group A is in a position of power over group B it is certain that members of group A will use their power to abuse group B. Let's look at a small handful of examples of what happens when cultures with large amounts of anti-white hatred are empowered in real world:

EUROPE:

Some of you may be aware of the problem that many European nations are having 'integrating' their new Muslim 'citizens'. The main difficulty lies in the fact that many of these Muslims do not want to integrate into European life or culture, they want to displace it. Toward that end, Muslims in Europe are waging a low intensity war against the indigenous populations of their adopted nations. Muslims are waging a campaign of violence, riots, crime, rape, and radicalism clearly showing that many have *no* desire to be a part of existing European society.

Rape rates have skyrocketed as violent Muslims turn their anger on native European women and girls. It's so bad in some countries that it is being referred to as an epidemic. The French riots of 2005 and 2006 were partly a result of French police entering into Muslim no-go areas that Muslims have forbidden the French to enter. Muslim communities all over Europe have adopted similar policies, claiming that their communities now constitute sovereign Muslim territory in which the infidels have no right to be. Due to the difference in birth rates between Muslims and native Europeans, many European nations are on track to be majority Muslim within the next 20-30 years. At that point, Muslims will be able to institute sharia law quite easily, and historical European culture and its nations will be dead.

All of this is the result of liberal European immigration policies and a worship of tolerance so extreme that it has become suicidal. Europeans are slowly waking up to the reality of the monster they have created. There won't be any easy solutions to the problems they have made for themselves. These problems could have been avoided all together if Europeans wouldn't have taken such extreme measures to enable and empower those who have been clearly proven to hate them.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

(multi-part post, part 8/9)

Anonymous said...

(multi-part post, part 9/9)

I've made my point especially clear. I have clearly shown that there is a strong and powerful level of anti-white hate in many non-white cultures. I have also clearly shown the horrific results that occur when the powerful hatred that exists in many non-white cultures is empowered and enabled. Anyone still in denial that strong anti-white hatred exists in many non-white cultures or that empowering these cultures is directly contrary to the interests of white people is either a liar, or completely out of their minds.

I have repeatedly stated that there is no reason for sane white people to disadvantage and disempower themselves for the benefit of groups and peoples who are filled with anger and hate towards them. There is no rational reason to do such a thing. It is utterly insane. I have repeatedly asked if anyone can come up with even a single reason why whites should do such a foolish thing and no one has been up to the challenge. Is that because we don't have enough anti-racists here? No, not at all. It's because my fundamental point is irrefutably true. There is no rational reason for whites to support the anti-racist movement. The goals of the anti-racist movement are fundamentally opposed to the well being of white people and no sane, self respecting white person should support it.

I'd like to close by asking white anti-racists to think about why they are supporting the goals of the anti-racist movement. The cultures of the people you are working to help and empower are filled with *hate* toward you. I have shown you this with undeniable evidence. I have also shown you what happens when those infected with this hatred are allowed to have power. You need to understand that the hatred prevalent in the cultures of these 'minority' groups will not pass you by just because you are an 'anti-racist'. If these hateful groups ever come to power, they will treat you no different than the other whites that they hate. By supporting those who consider you to be the enemy, you are cutting your own throat. What you're doing is insane.

Do you want to end up subjugated by people who hate you? Why are you helping those who, if they were to take power, would do exactly that? The anti-racists tell you that the reason non-whites are so angry is because they are oppressed. The anti-racist solution to this problem is place *you* under the boot of the angry 'minorities'. Is that what you want for yourself? For your white friends or family? If it is then just keep up your activism and your dreams may very well come true one day, just like they did for anti-racists in South Africa and Rhodesia. If that isn't the kind of future you want, then you need to wake up and start acting in your own interests, instead of serving the interests of those who will only hate you for your kindness.

(multi-part post, part 9/9)

plain(s)feminist said...

Anonymous - I have just returned from work and I see that you are essentially using my blog as your own. I don't have time now to do more than skim your comments. I will read them when I can, probably tomorrow evening. If you would like to address these issues on your own blog and leave a link, that's fine, but to respond at such great length on someone else's blog is not really in keeping with the spirit of the comment function.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry to leave such long comments on your blog, but I did so because I had a point to make and I now feel that I've made it. You're right, if I had a blog it would probably have been more appropriate to post a link to it rather than to post at such length. I won't make such long posts in the future, as if you don't have the time to read them then it makes little sense for me to take the time to write them. Like I said, I don't think there will even be a need to write such extended comments again. I just wanted to show, as clearly as I could, that there is indeed a great deal of hatred in 'minority' communities directed at white people and to further show that this hatred leads to very bad outcomes for whites when it is empowered. I feel I've done that now. Anyone who can't see that fact at this point wouldn't believe it no matter how much additional evidence was posted. Thank you for your indulgence in the posting of my long comments.

plain(s)feminist said...

OK. I've read Anonymous' comments. Anonymous, that's about the biggest pile of bullshit I've stepped in lately. I am seriously contemplating deleting it because it is stinking up the place. And, frankly, whatever fantasies you have about how much white people are hated (I notice you even managed to include the myth of the black rapist), my readers do not deserve to have to read such stereotypical, ignorant racism - and certainly not on my pages. It is stinking up the place.

And no, I'm not going to respond to your dissertation or your "proof." There is clearly no point. You've taken things out of context, you've presented stereotypes and myths as facts, you've made gross overgeneralizations, you've presented incorrect information, you've shown little understanding of history - there is really nothing more to say, and you are convincing no one. Take it somewhere else.

the_anonymous_poster said...

I wondered how long it would take to reach this point. Nothing I've posted is a 'myth' or a 'fantasy'. I've provided credible sources for everything I've said. No reasonable person can look at the evidence I've presented and not conclude that there is indeed a great deal of anti-white hatred present in many non-white cultures. I know this, and you know it too.

You've given several rather lame excuses as to why you can't be bothered to respond to my key points or to the evidence I've posted in support of them. The real reason you won't respond - and indeed can't respond - is because the anti-racist position has *no* answer to the question I've raised. Why should sane white people disempower themselves in order to empower those who hate them? There is no reason, no reason at all. To do so is insane, and only leads pain and hardship for white people.

You can obviously delete my posts - I fully expect you to do so. However, you cannot delete the facts I've brought to light or the questions I have raised. They will always be out there, in the real world, waiting for anyone with a little curiosity and the capacity for independent thought to discover and ponder. The wonderful thing is that people are doing both in increasing numbers as reality itself continues to expose the true nature of the 'anti-racist' position.

Anti-racism is not about making a better world - certainly not a better world for whites. Anti-racism is about exacerbating anti-white hatred in 'minority' groups while simultaneously brainwashing whites into believing that they deserve to be victimized and hated. Anti-racism is harmful to whites and is completely without a moral foundation. Anti-racism isn't really opposed to racism at all, it's just another form of it - with whites as the target of its hate.

Your lack of desire to address these issues shows quite clearly that you have little concern for the well being of the white students you are 'educating' with your anti-racist views. You obviously don't care that the false guilt you're instilling them with is harming them, and will harm them more in the future. So long as they are infused with the appropriate doses of anti-racist dogma I'm sure you'll consider your mission a success.

Go ahead and delete everything I've written. I can't see as you have any choice at this point. I have beaten you utterly and exposed your position as being thoroughly opposed to the interests of white people. There is nothing you can do now but attempt to hide that fact from the world. One thing you can't do, as I said before, is to delete the facts I have presented here. No matter what you do those facts will continue to exist as an indelible counter example to anti-racist dogma. As more and more people become aware of the facts it will be impossible for you to hide this simple truth:

There is no reason for normal, sane white people to help and support 'minority' groups who hate them.

Doing so is crazy, self-hating and ultimately suicidal. Any movement that calls on whites to support the interests of those who hate them is insane and deserves no support, but only scorn.

P.S. - I see that you've disabled anonymous posting. It's obvious that you don't want me back so I won't be posting again. I just wanted to drop you one final note to let you know that, no matter how many lies you tell, the truth will ultimately prevail.

Cassandra Says said...

Wow. That was just...wow.

Could he be any more paranoid? Isn't there medication for that kind of thing?

And in case he's still lurkig...yes, dear, we are laughing at you.

Ravenmn said...

"There is no reason for sane white people to disempower themselves in order to help groups who clearly have much hate for them. It is insane. "

Plains, I wish I'd checked in here earlier. This is fascinating and weird. Why the heck would anonymous choose your blog to post this long argument?

Anonymous, I have not read everything. I'll try to print this out at work tomorrow and respond more directly.

Meanwhile, to your direct question: why "disempower" oneself of privilege?

You're right. It does seem absurd on the surface.

However, have you never noticed the disadvantages that come from unearned privilege?

One thing that was immediately apparent on this thread is your fear of being in non-white neighborhoods. Many white people have posted about their comfort in non-white neighborhoods. Wouldn't it be great to lose your fear?

Nonwhite people have developed amazing methods of dealing with oppression and lack of power. Wouldn't we all benefit from learning some of these skills?

You speak of people of color this way: "Helping to empower those who hate you ."

But haven't you noticed that the vast majority of nonwhite people don't actually hate us? Doesn't that tell us something about the capacity to love one another? Could we not learn something from that?

I'll agree that you may not accept all of the tenets of white supremacy. But if your conclusions are the same, why demand to be considered separate?