H/T Youth for Western Civilization.
Three lessons to draw from this:
1.) First, Bob Whitaker’s mantra is true, “anti-racist” is synonymous with “anti-white.”
2.) Second, it is perfectly mainstream and acceptable to promote fear, loathing, and hatred of White people. If any other group were the target of such venom, it would be denounced as “racism.” If you are non-White, you can get away with this stuff. You can even be a respected professor at UCLA! It’s not hate, it is “speaking truth to power.”
3.) Third, “racism” is something White people do. It is a mere word, a tool, that is exclusively used to morally bully soft White people into surrendering their interests. The term has no other meaning. It is like a magic spell that when cast turns smart people into idiots. It is amazing what you can get White people to do for you to avoid being thought of as racists.
This clown is a professor? ROFL!
There’s a real simple way for him and his people to completely avoid all the racism, exploitation and imperialism that he condemns: STAY IN MEXICO!
Anyway, blame the Latins. We blame Jews for what they have created, why can’t we blame the Spanish and Portuguese for their mixed descendants that are invading our country like the one that spoke at that rally.
Present and future WNs can easily reply to the “racism” gambit of blacks, browns, and their Jewish handlers: “that’s right. We want a white NAACP. We want a White La Raza. We want a White ADL. We are exactly as ‘racist’ as you are, and we intend to defeat you on your own ground.”
CompassionateFascist:
We will have to show fellow Whites that colorblindness is no longer allowed by our elites. The only choices are standing for White survival, or anti-White policies until Whites are extinct.
I honestly doubt this guy is a professor. Possibly a non-tenured lecturer or part-time temporary faculty or something like that.
1.) First, Bob Whitaker’s mantra is true, “anti-racist” is synonymous with “anti-white.”
It makes for good propaganda but no way is it synonymous. Anti-racist is just that, anti-racist. The world’s bigger than America, Hunter. There are ample reasons to be anti-racist in Brazil, in Colombia, in India, to name only a few societies in which racism can readily pose social problems. Anti-racism can’t be equated with anti-white in those cases.
Regarding (3), I think you can pursue those interests without resorting to the crude, in-your-face racism that you so often indulge in. It can be very frustrating to have to deal with some of the stupidity of Idiot Left rule, so it’s understandable that people will occasionally boil over. But in general it should be avoided. I mean, you playing that Johnny Rebel song (“get away, get away, you don’t belong in Dixie”). Gimme a break, what the hell good does that do you? Oh, big, tough Hunter Wallace, refuses to be intimidated by the “PC Left,” and goddamit he wants to say nigger he’ll say nigger. Yeah, okay pal. That really helps people appreciate what your cause is all about.
Silver: You are putting words in my mouth, again!
I have never played the Johnny Rebel song.
I am very sorry, Silver. I thought you were responding to comment #3; not the part 3 of Hunter Wallace’s post! I apologize!
5 Silver: Words have literal meanings and common or idiomatic meanings. The words “anti racist”, as actually used in America, mean “anti White”. The people who describe themselves as “anti racist” do not generally concern themselves with Black assaults on Whites, but with perceived White disapproval of Blacks. They do not object to Mexican hostility towards Whites, but with White objections to our own displacement. In any conflict between Whites and other races, they side with the non-Whites. They are, plainly, prejudiced against Whites. They are not anti-racist in any literal or logical sense, unless you accept the premise that only Whites can be racist. And they certainly don’t concern themselves with oppressed Dravidians in India.
“And they certainly don’t concern themselves with oppressed Dravidians in India.’
Or even oppressed Blacks in Latin America.
Mark,
The creation of Latin America was a tiny misfortune compared to what British swine did in World War II, in terms of tipping the scales to the Soviets.
The people in Latin America would’ve stayed there if it wasn’t for the ideological triumph of hardcore Liberalism brought about by Allied victory in World War II.
Dr. MacDonald was right to say we need to start supplying our own security at events. Anti-white hatred is so mainstream that this kind of chicano crap is as common as “rice and beans” in LA….
The chicano was right about one thing, “the average white man is a coward” now. Unless we start to launch a counter offensive it’s over.
Ever since the Sons of Aryas conquered the lesser peoples of the Earth, the cry of the conquered has always been “anti racism”.
Christianity, Islam, and Communism (all Jewish religions) teach that all people are equal in the eyes of the highest power; which is odd because nothing could be more objectively untrue.
I don’t blame Mexicans for standing up for their race; in fact we probably both want the same things: racial and cultural continuity and purity. We just need to stay in our own lands. Were whites in America really wanting to keep themselves separated from other races they would promote leftist governments in the colored world. Notice how Castro doesn’t let his people come here but our “right wing” “friends” in Mexico do?
Let the brown skinned people live in the poverty and tyranny that is communism. In a few generations, whites will once again be in a position to colonize the entire world. Let us avoid the error of the British, which was the desire to rule over the colored in a stratified but none-the-less mixed society. No mixing should be allowed.
@ Nietzsche #11; Yes, it’s high time white people did our own dirty work, revalued manual labor and quit trying to get rich of the backs of non-whites while destroying our homelands by the presence of non-whites. That has to stop.
If we are a folk then we need to behave as a folk. The Scottish clans may give us an idea of what to strive towards.
“Why is it that these frail, racist white people…”
What is it with blacks and mestizos and their ‘weak white people’ mantra? Whites are physically the strongest and toughest race on earth. They should go to google images and search world’s strongest man or olympic weightlifting and count the first hundred faces and see how few are not white, even though whites are less than 10 percent of the world’s population. Could you imagine a team of Africans or Mexicans conquering the poles on foot? Please. Of course, many whites are too dispirited or just too lazy to reach their potential, but it’s there whenever you want it, whitey. You like getting pushed around at protests? Craigslist is full of like-new weightlifting equipment, and if you’re Johnny-on-the-spot you can buy it dirt cheap. Machines are very poor compared to barbells and dumbbells. You have to have free weights, and you have to have a program. Check out New Rules of Lifting, Starting Strength, or Dinosaur Training. What have you got to lose?
Look, it’s Ward Churchill’s twin brother!
“Weak, frail white people”…
Yeah, strength and vigor are the first things that pop into my head when I see a 5’1” bronze-colored manual laborer wandering through Wal-Mart in ratty jeans and a baseball cap.
Hollywood is calling for the little brown people to rise up in an anti-white revolution as well:
Your representation of the video didn’t seem accurate. He explicitly said (and had the crowd repeat him) that their enemy was not the Minutemen but capitalism & imperialism. The one time he mentioned whites it was to deny that immigration restrictionism was motivated by racism, instead saying it was due to fears of revolutionaries. I happen to think he’s wrong and that latin americans are fairly docile (this is sometimes given as part of the motivation for U.S elites to import them). Che was completely wrong about any sort of “domino theory”, foco failed everywhere as rightist governments popped up in South America and Che himself was killed.
Getting back on track, he does explicitly call for revolution but framed as typical leftism rather than race-based (“la raza” is just seen as a leading vanguard of said revolution).
Gussie Fink-Nottle,
Yeah, looks like Hollywood is trying to ramp up the anti-White violence. No doubt they’ll succeed as the target audience for this agitprop has an average IQ of less than 87.
Comment #19: Imagine the irony of the White Actors of that movie getting caught up in the anti-White violence they are inciting.
Three lessons to draw from this
The Narrative is where all that rubber meets the road. All of the leftist anti-white rhetoric is implemented through the Narrative, i.e., the fruit of the leftist dominance of discourse. The Narrative is what allows them to hold such a mass of contradictions, lies, and injustices together and pretend it makes an iota of sense.
It makes for good propaganda but no way is it synonymous. Anti-racist is just that, anti-racist. The world’s bigger than America, Hunter. There are ample reasons to be anti-racist in Brazil, in Colombia, in India, to name only a few societies in which racism can readily pose social problems. Anti-racism can’t be equated with anti-white in those cases.
But we’re not in Brazil, Colombia, or India. We’re talking about places where whites live.
The people who describe themselves as “anti racist” do not generally concern themselves with Black assaults on Whites, but with perceived White disapproval of Blacks. They do not object to Mexican hostility towards Whites, but with White objections to our own displacement. In any conflict between Whites and other races, they side with the non-Whites. They are, plainly, prejudiced against Whites. They are not anti-racist in any literal or logical sense, unless you accept the premise that only Whites can be racist. And they certainly don’t concern themselves with oppressed Dravidians in India.
Again, this is owed largely to the Narrative, overwhelmingly so in the case of white leftists. The Useful Idiots take their cues from the Narrative, which is itself anti-white, though leftists generally are not.
Leftism is all about who has the bullhorn. This is why screeching fanaticism is built-in; the authors know controlling the Narrative is everything, and handing the bullhorn to someone else (i.e., open discourse and exchange of ideas) is anathema.
HW writes:
>”“racism” is something White people do. It is a mere word, a tool, that is >exclusively used to morally bully soft White people into surrendering >their interests.”
Yes, absolutely, 100% correct.
Note that the group here throwing out the “RACIST” label is the National Council of LaRaza – translates into English as….
THE RACE.
Being called “RACIST” by a racial advocacy group called “THE RACE” is like being called a “Criminal” by an official of….
THE GAMBINO CRIME FAMILY.
🙂
Have some fun with this stuff.
These people are #*$(%$# idiots.
Silver – It makes for good propaganda but no way is it synonymous. Anti-racist is just that, anti-racist.
Not on planet earth.
Conflict between non-whites is rarely described as racist.
Anti-white activity by non-whites is often described as reverse racism.
The intent of that is clear. Real racism is what whites do, when non-whites do something bad it doesnt even have a proper title, just the clumsy, made up sounding reverse racism, because its so rare, almost an impossibility
Sure, the police are tasked with investigating accusations of racism and hate crimes of non-whites against whites and other non-whites but that never intrudes into the public domain as a matter of concern where ‘something must be done’. No one shudders in horror at the thought of reverse racism, there is no emptional response to that.
Svigor: “the Narrative, i.e., the fruit of the leftist dominance of discourse”
Leftists are concerned about sticking to the Narrative. In other words: striking the right posture.
They want to be on the record as supporting more immigration from the third-world. It doesn’t mean they want the country to become full of non-whites. They have no opinion whether the ideal proportion of non-whites is 1% or 99%. From their point of view, it would be great if all the non-whites were suddenly killed by a racist virus, as it would make it easier to import more non-whites in the future. The leftists do not think that the end justifies the means. They think that taking a stylized leftish posture justifies not caring about the consequences. They don’t have an objective beyond the posture.
“Leftism is all about who has the bullhorn. This is why screeching fanaticism is built-in “
They have no objective, no limits, and they are trying to outdo each other, hence the fanaticism. When the leftists in government and the media try to outposture each other, it leads to leftist deadlock, and Western civilization is doomed.
Armor: I disagree! White Leftists want a more non-White society. I have hard many desire a minority White America.
Even before my “awakening,” I did not want White minority status; I just took it for granted that Whites would always be the majority of America. Some are probably still like this; but don’t be fooled by the Keith Olbermann’s and Ted Kenndy’s.
“White Leftists want a more non-White society.”
What’s funny is that, instead of saying they want “so much”, they just say they want “more” ! They won’t give a number or set limits.
23 Svigor: “The narrative”. I hadn’t heard that idea exactly, but it makes sense. People don’t make up a new theory every time they learn a new fact, they try to fit it into the theory they already have. That’s why the first plains Indians to see a train tried to stop it with their “medicine”, and got run over. Hopefully, the deluded white masses will reassess their narrative when the economic and racial trains knock them down.
The words “anti racist”, as actually used in America, mean “anti White”.
Anti-racism as applied in America and other white countries deals with one type of racism — white racism. That effort often takes the form of being effectively anti-white but that hardly means it’s anti-white by design.
You’re correct that American anti-racists usually don’t recognize anti-white forms of racism; they’re blinded in this by their insistence that racism only flows from whiter to darker, an insistence itself rooted in the historical American experience.
Svigor, your heat to point ratio is rising again.
Silver,
I’m not really interested in how people react to what we say overseas. This blog has always been focused on the United States. In America, 9 out of 10 times anti-racism is synonymous with anti-White, and I will continue to insist on making the connection.
32 Silver: I don’t think that the “anti-racists” insistence that “racism” is something that Whites do to other races is rooted in American historical experience. Most of them don’t know squat about history. Their notions of “racism” are rooted in Hollywood and school propaganda. Any real experience of racism they might have would be of Blacks attacking Whites, Blacks being given preferences over Whites, or Blacks being excused for behavior that would get a White crucified. “Anti-racism” is, among other things, a blind rejection of the evidence of one’s own eyes.