Progressive, happy Sweden has long been a haven for refugees, accepting Jews, Eastern Europeans and Bosnians from Europe’s 20th century conflicts and hundreds of thousands more people from the current migrant crisis. Last year, while other EU states debated sending Syrians back to Turkey, Sweden single-handedly took in over 160,000 people. But not all Swedes are happy with their reputation as a humanitarian superpower.
These Swedes care more about protecting their own interests, rather than pissing everything away in favour of another group of people. How evil of them.
The term “far-right” is thrown around far too much these days and is losing all meaning. If wanting your country to have a sane immigration policy which doesn’t result in your own ethnic group being displaced in your ancestral homeland makes you “far-right”, then so be it. Living with the term over your head is far better than having your way of life completely destroyed, just for the sake of being “tolerant”.
Assuming these weren’t just more cases ofthe migrantssetting their own accommodationon fire, and it really was “far-right” Swedes who were guilty, does that not really send a message? I don’t condone violence, but to me it sounds like these people must be feeling desperate to resort to such measures. I doubt it’s just simply a case of “they don’t like the migrants because of their skin colour”. There’s obviously a lot more to it than that.
To understand what’s going on with their usually peaceful neighbors, Danish photographers Jonas Fogh and Sofia Busk spoke with members and supporters of Sweden’s anti-immigration groups, including the Swedish Democrats, Nordic Youth and Nordic Resistance Movement. Interviewed from June to Nov. 2015, these are the Swedes who would willingly destroy Sweden’s tolerant, utopian reputation:
No, it’s the rapists, rioters, terrorists, and other assorted criminals that Sweden has imported that are destroying its reputation, not the desperate people who are fighting back to protect themselves and their homeland.
“In ten years, Sweden won’t exist anymore—not if the refugees keep coming. Then Sweden will stop being Swedish. The children will no longer be allowed to dress up as gingerbread men at the Lucia Parade because they are brown and people will find that racist,” says Kikki Toivola, 22.
But…but… that’s impossible. Geographical location is what determines everything. The soil and air of Sweden will magically alter the personalities and value systems of the “refugees” and they’ll be transformed into Swedish people. They absolutely won’t alter Sweden so that it resembles the countries they came from. Just like how when Europeans went to America and Australia, they all started behaving just like Native Americans and Aborigines, rather than transforming America and Australia into European like societies.
“The refugees come to Sweden, and we accept them with open arms. We give them money, a roof over their heads, food and clothing. We give them all of what they don’t have. We arrange housing for them, and then they don’t want to live there—I don’t get it. They get everything served on a silver platter. I’m a single mother, and I don’t have as many resources as they do. They get paradise here, yet they aren’t thankful.”
Well madam, don’t you understand that you have white skin? Therefore, colonialism, The Crusades, slavery, the Holocaust, and various other historical crimes are hardwired into your DNA making you personally responsible? You’ll never be able to make amends for all those historical injustices that you are personally responsible for by virtue of your skin pigmentation, but nevertheless, you must spend the rest of your life trying to do so, by doing everything for these people. It’s the right thing to do.
“You can’t say anything without being called a racist,” says Robert Johansson, a woodsman living near Älmhult. “I’ve lost my pride in being Swedish. Instead it suddenly feels wrong.”
You aren’t supposed to feel pride in being Swedish. That’s the whole point. They want to demoralise you and destroy any pride you have in your ethnic heritage. Don’t fall for it.
“The most important part for us is that you don’t mix races. The Nordic race is behind a lot of inventions and much of the culture that have been created. It would be dangerous for all mankind if our abilities disappeared,” says Simon Lindberg, the 32-year-old leader of Sweden’s Nordic Resistance Movement. “We want to have nature’s biological diversity, and ensure that there are different races in the world, but we believe that the Nordic race deserves to endure.”
Wanting to ensure that his race continues to exist? How dare he think that all races have equal rights to continued existence? Who does this guy think he is, a polar bear or something? Nordic people clearly don’t have a right to exist because of their genetic racism.
“In Sweden, the politicians opened up for mass migration in 1965, and we believe that anyone who came here after 1965 should be tested for their race. If they don’t belong to the Nordic race or a closely related people, they should be sent home.”
1965… the same year that America started doing the same thing. And by a funny coincidence in both situations, one of the main forces in each case for pushing for these changes were Jews, David Schwarz in Sweden, and NorbertSchlei in America. Isn’t it funny how God’s chosen people seem to always be involved in promoting multiculturalism? Sure theyeven admitit themselves.
Must just be a coincidence 😛
Rasmus Johansson Huléen, 18: ‘There are quite a few refugees at my school, but I don’t talk to them.”
“Nationalism is love. Nationalism is love for your country, for your people and for your family,” says Robin Hammarström, 26.
That’s essentially how we’re programmed by the media to think about Nationalists.
“I help my own family first, and by extension, the nation and the people. Then I can start helping people from other parts of the world, but not right now: Right now I have to help my own people of Sweden. Swedes are too naive and always pity others, but you can’t help the entire world right now.”
Perfectly reasonable. This is called kin selection. However, if you were to listen to the various cucks, virtue signalling on social media about throwing open our borders to the entire world, you would be led to believe that this basic biological behaviour is evil somehow.
Pieter Bevelander, director of the Malmö Institute for Studies of Migration, Diversity and Welfare in Sweden, notes that anti-immigration voices are nothing new. “In the early 1990s, with the Bosnian refugee groups, we had the same kind of reactions from extreme groups,” he says.
I doubt the Bosnians were anywhere near as bad the current crowd. There’s probably a lot more reason to feel uncomfortable with the ones coming in now.
In Nov. 2015, Swedish prime minister Stefan Lövfan announced that new border controls and mandatory ID checks would be put in place.
He should probably consider building a wall as well 😉
Which of course solves nothing. Literally lets send people back in exchange for an equal number of people who are “genuine”. However none of them are genuine by virtue of the fact that Turkey isn’t a warzone meaning, once they reach Turkey, they shouldn’t be going any further. Add in the fact that Turkey is demanding visa free travel to the EU for their 75 million citizens and you end up being even more overrun than we would have been beforehand. It’s insanity.
The number of people seeking asylum in Sweden has since plunged from 39,196 in Oct. 2015, to just over 2,100 in May 2016.
Black Pigeon Speaks is definitely becoming one of my favourite video producers on YouTube. His videos are not only informative, but concise, to the point, professionally edited, and most importantly, they’re inoffensive enough that they can be used as a great starting point for waking people up to the problems in the world without scaring them off too quickly by being too politically incorrect.
His latest video is all about George Soros. I think it’s important to share this particular video because Soros truly is one of the biggest threats to the world right now, yet not many ordinary people are aware of him and the things he gets up to. Indeed, many of the things he does get up to sound very nice on the surface. If you didn’t look into him in great detail, you could easily mistake him for being a great humanitarian, whose only concern is helping his fellow man (and woman) whenever they’re in need. In reality, he’s quite possibly the greatest threat to the existence of western civilisation right now. I’ve already discussed Soros in a previous post of mine, and this video brings up a lot of the points that I already mentioned in that post (as well as several others that I wasn’t even aware of myself).
Check it out. It’s important that more people become aware of this guy and his schemes.
Al-Qaeda has praised Orlando gunman Omar Mateen but criticised him for targeting gays, saying lone wolf jihadists should attack white Americans and avoid minorities so that no one mistakes their terror assaults for hate crimes.
This just confirms that specifically targeting white people for murder isn’t considered a hate crime. If a person specifically targeted blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, Jews etc because of their race, it would be considered a hate crime. White people’s lives however, aren’t as important, so it’s just a normal crime when they’re the ones who are specifically targeted.
In an article in the latest edition of its online magazine Inspire, Al-Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), called for more “self-directed” Muslim terrorists to kill in America. In the article, titled Inspire guide: Orlando operation, the terror group tells terrorists to “avoid targeting places and crowds where minorities are generally found” because if gays or Latinos appear to be the targets, “the federal government will be the one taking full responsibility.”
They don’t want anyone else getting the credit for their attacks. Omar Mateen made a point of ringing 911 and pledging allegience to ISIS before making his attack, but the SJW establishment didn’t want the attack to be linked to Islamic terrorism, so they tried to present it as a simple homophobic attack instead. The terrorists don’t like this. They want credit for their attacks. The problem however, is that SJWs don’t want Islam to get a bad reputation, so they’ll do everything in their power to place the blame anywhere else.
The online magazine praises the Orlando attack but instructs terrorists to target “Anglo-Saxons”, Fox News reported. In the 12 June attack in Orlando, Omar Mateen massacred 49 people and injured 53 inside a gay nightclub in Orlando.
Although Mateen, who was later killed by police, told hostage negotiators he pledged allegiance to ISIS, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch has characterised the attack as a hate crime against gays.
Yes it was just a simple hate crime against gay people, the kind that happen every single day. It could just as easily have been a Christian bigot who killed them. Sure, these Christian bigots haven’t actually moved beyond refusing to bake gay wedding cakes, or picketing gay funerals with “God Hates Fags” signs, but clearly Christianity is just as dangerous towards gay people as the religion whose followers regularly throw gay people off of roofs, or hang them from cranes, in countries they are they majority in. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam specifically. It’s just general homophobia.
“I cannot tell you definitively that we will ever narrow it down to one motivation,” Lynch told reporters last week. “People often act out of more than one motivation. This was clearly an act of terror and an act of hate,” she had said.
Well at least she was willing to admit the terror part. Unlike the teleprompter reader in chief who refuses to acknowledge the link between Islam and terrorism.
Although Al-Qaeda does not take credit for Mateen’s attack in the online article, it urges more “lone wolves” to take up arms. Jihadists should target “areas where the Anglo-Saxon community is generally concentrated,” it states.
“This class of the American community is the majority and it is the one that is in the American leadership,” it says. Al Qaeda is “very carefully threading a needle” by endorsing the attack while criticising Mateen’s target selection, said Ryan Mauro, national security analyst for Clarion Project, a Washington-based nonprofit that tracks the international terror threat.
“This is Al Qaeda’s way of asserting itself above ISIS in the wake of its competitor’s success,” Mauro was quoted as saying. Inspire magazine often exploits terror attacks in the West and makes threats against Europe and the United States. While the terror group responsible for 9/11 has been overshadowed by rival ISIS in recent years, it praised Mateen for his monstrous act.
I don’t think there’s anything more that needs to be said. It all speaks for itself really. One of the worst terrorist organisations in the world is literally encouraging lone wolf terrorists to specifically target white people because they know our lives matter less and that an attack on us won’t be twisted to fit a hate crime narrative.
Wow, I’ll be damned. I was starting to buy into the propaganda that it wouldn’t actually happen. Yet here it is. The UK actually voted to leave the EU. With all the negativity in the media surrounding it, I was expecting a very close win for the remain side (like literally around 50.1% to 49.9% in favour of remain), or even for them to rig the vote somehow. I am shocked to see that it really has happened. It feels surreal.
There’s a lot of fear and worry about what this will mean, not just for Britain, but for the rest of Europe as well. Most people on social media (at least in my social circles) seem to be convinced that this will be a disaster. The way I see it though, we don’t actually know yet what will happen. It could indeed be a disaster, or it could end up being the best decision that Britain has ever made.
I do however believe that the EU, in its current form at least, was inevitably doomed no matter what. I think the mishandling of the migrant situation, the Eurozone financial problems, and the rising popularity of extreme parties would have caused the EU to either collapse eventually under its own weight, or force it to become more authoritarian and centralised in its power structure, in order to survive…completely contrary to the ideals it was supposedly set up under. When choosing between the guaranteed misery of less sovereignty, less democracy, and less control of your own destiny, along with the increases in terrorism, riots, rapes, and welfare payments due to the migrant situation, or the great unknown which could go either way… can you really blame people for taking the risk on the great unknown? In fact, I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if other countries eventually follow suit, and bring the whole project down with them in the process. I could see economically devastated countries like Greece or Italy getting fed up and leaving at some point. Maybe France might leave as well due to their own growing resentment towards the problems they are dealing with. The UK leaving could just be the first in a domino effect.
Personally, I do believe that there will be a lot of hardship, for the EU and the UK alike, at least in the short term. I can see the EU levying heavy sanctions at the UK, both to spite them, and to make an example of them to any other country which thinks about doing the same thing. In the long term though as I said, I think the EU project itself is doomed so by that point, any sanctions will be meaningless. We’ll all be fending for ourselves as individual nations and will be looking to do what’s best for us including, if necessary, getting back on good terms with the UK.
Black Pigeon speaks made a video where he gives his theories as to what could happen.
Whatever happens, all I know is this. We’re seeing huge historical events unfold before our eyes in real time. These are the times that we’ll be telling our grandchildren about. I’m genuinely excited to see what happens next. Maybe, just maybe…
So a writer for the Irish Times engaged in a most heinous act of crimethink by daring to criticise feminism in an article he wrote. It wasn’t very well written, but the general point he made was that it might make more sense for feminists to engage more with good men to solve problems they face, rather than alienating us by treating us all like we’re potential rapists and misogynists.
Luckily a brave feminist has decided to stand up against this misogyny, by writing a response (as is her right). I have decided to write a response of my own to her response.
Having managed to injure myself by falling off a pavement, I’ve been confined to my couch for several days (and secretly delighted). To allay cabin fever I’ve been reading a lot, and today I finished Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s eloquently-argued essay “We Should All Be Feminists.”
It’s a short, simple but enlightening piece, adapted from a TEDx talk, where she points out that anyone, male or female, “who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes” is by definition a feminist. It’s really that simple.
Imagine if the Pope was to say that anyone who believes that Jesus Christ was the son of God is a Catholic by definition. I bet that would piss of a lot of Protestants who don’t want anything to do with Catholicism. They may agree with the core issue, but there’s a lot of other baggage that comes with Catholicism beyond that core issue that need to be considered. It’s the same with feminism. A person can believe in equality for the sexes, but that doesn’t mean they’re feminists because they might not necessarily agree with other aspects of feminism as an ideology. Feminism does not that have a monopoly on belief in the concept of “Gender Equality” anymore than Catholicism has a monopoly on Christianity.
So how has a word that basically means you believe in fairness become so loaded?
Might have something to do with the actions and words of self proclaimed feminists. I mean lets just look at these quotes from three very famous leading feminist theorists.
These aren’t just random nobodies. Dworkin, Solonas, and Gearhart are all highly influential and respected figures in feminist history. Beyond these quotes, lets consider some of actions committed under the banner of feminism.
They’ve given us the Duluth Model for dealing with domestic violence, which automatically assumes that the man is the guilty party.
And those are just a few examples. The reason why feminism has gotten such a bad reputation is obviously because of the actions of people who call themselves feminists. Look I’m not saying that every single person who calls themselves a feminist engages in behaviour like this. But can you honestly blame people for not wanting to associate with the term after seeing things like this?
It was kind of bizarre and a tad depressing to read this balanced, rational essay and this weekend’s Irish Times opinion piece by business affairs correspondent Mark Paul in the same day.
“How dare that man have an opinion that I don’t approve of. I mean come on, hasn’t he ever read a dictionary?”
His article was a response to journalist Rosemary Mac Cabe sharing her experiences of harassment in a manner he perceived as accusing all men of being sexual predators (even though she clearly closes her thread by saying “It might not be all men, but it’s more than enough men”.)
In it he implores feminists – who he helpfully compares to “angry chickens armed with machine guns” – not to tar all men with the same brush. But for an article that calls for an end to sweeping generalisations, a title like “Feminists busy shooting themselves in the foot” seems pretty hypocritical, not to mention inflammatory.
The difference between his generalisation and hers is that feminism is an ideology that people choose to hold. Being a man is something you’re born as. Can you really not tell the difference? Here, I’ll make it easier by giving an example of how it works.
It would be wrong to generalise all German people from the 1930s and 40s as anti-semites just because anti-semitism was big in Germany at the time, as they didn’t choose to be born as Germans, any more than men choose to be born male. However, it would be perfectly appropriate to generalise all Nazis in Germany as anti-semites, because they willingly adopted the ideology . Even if they weren’t personally involved in persecuting the Jews, they still showed their support for the persecution, by adopting an ideology which was clearly anti-semitic.
There are so many things about this article that make me genuinely worry about the lack of understanding of what feminism actually is.
I always love this argument the most. They must really think we’re stupid, or just aren’t paying attention. No, it isn’t that we don’t understand. We’re constantly told about how “feminism is equality” and that we should just read the dictionary. There’s no way that we couldn’t understand, because we hear it all time. We just don’t believe you. That’s what it really is.
What’s especially worrying is the constant use of the word angry as an insult. For a time it seemed like the word feminism itself had come to mean “angry woman”, an image so laden with negative cultural connotations that ill-informed celebrities like Kaley Cuoco started to disassociate themselves from it.
As well as labelling “angry” feminists, this article is scathing of “loud feminists” throughout, with apparently no awareness that the obvious implication that a women being loud is somehow inherently negative might possibly be part of what those very feminists are angry about.
Yes because nobody ever looks at loud men or loud non-feminist women negatively. It’s just feminists who are looked at in a negative manner for being loud.
The inference is that women shouldn’t be angry. Even if we’re told we have a nice arse by our 50 year old boss at our first real job, as I was at 19.
That’s a good reason to be angry, I’ll admit. I would however suggest that if such a thing happens, you should stand up for yourselves by politely tell him that you don’t feel comfortable with such comments. If he apologises and doesn’t do it again, then great, problem solved. If not, then maybe take further actions such as making formal complaints of sexual harassment. Ideally, you shouldn’t have to endure such treatment at all, but unfortunately there are some assholes in the world and sometimes certain actions are necessary.
Even if we’re harassed or assaulted.
Another good reason to be angry. However harassment and assault are not exclusive to one sex. Men get harassed and assaulted too, sometimes even by women. Even The Guardian (yes, that paper I despise) recognises this.
Even if we’re slut-shamed.
It’s usually other women who slut shame,rather than men. That’s not to say that men don’t look down on promiscuous women too. Of course that can and most likely does happen. However they’re less likely to actually tell them this, because it’s not in their interest to shame them from having sex.
Even if we’re paid less for doing the same job.
You’ve already long since won that battle. If a woman is being paid less than a man for the same job without other variables such as hours worked per week, overtime, leave of absence (such as parental leave), years of experience etc., being taken into account, then that’s illegal. Instead of complaining about it, do something.
Even if we’re dramatically underrepresented within the systems that govern our bodies, our lives and our societies.
There’s nothing stopping women from running for public office, nor is there anything stopping other women from voting for them. There are no barriers preventing women from having representation in public office in the Western world. If you believe there are, then why not explain how exactly women are being kept out of government unfairly?
The reality is, that there are simply a lower number of women than men who are interested in putting themselves forward for election on average. Then, many of the women who do put themselves forward aren’t getting elected because he electorate, 50% of whom are women, aren’t convinced that they’re worth voting for. Obviously there are some women who not only are interested, but who are more than competent enough to serve, as evident by the handful of women who do indeed represent us in elected capacity.
Most ordinary women from the electorate however have enough sense to vote for a candidate based on merit, rather than their genitalia. Should we just start forcing more women into politics against their will, and automatically vote for them, just because they’re women?
Well actually, that is essentially Hillary’s entire campaign. “Vote for me because I’m a woman”.
The fact that no one at The Irish Times thought any of this language was offensive boggles my mind.
“I personally find this offensive. Therefore it shouldn’t be published. Only views and opinions which I agree with should be allowed.”
Some people genuinely feel like they don’t experience inequality on a day-to-day basis, and that’s fine. We’re all entitled to our opinions.
And yet you’re whining about this guy expressing his opinions.
But there are opinions and then there are facts. It’s a fact that research shows that one in 12 female students in Irish colleges are victims of rape or attempted rape. That’s something we should all be angry about, “ardent feminist” or not.
Here’s the actual study that these statistics came from. Look, in case I haven’t made it obvious from previous posts I’ve made, I’ll say it again right here. Rape is a crime that disgusts me, and I feel nothing but sympathy for anyone who experiences it. As far as I’m concerned, even one rape is too high a number.
However, from looking at the results, there are two issues that immediately stand out. One is the vague language about “unwanted sexual experiences”. What exactly is the definition of unwanted sexual experiences?
The other issue, is that of 4181 copies of the survey distributed, about 1400 weren’t completed. A previous study in America which came to the conclusion that 1 in 5 college women were sexual assault victims had a similar problem, and it has been suggested that this may have skewed the results because victims were more motivated to complete the survey than non-victims.
Situations like this, where a woman consents to sex but later regrets it, or willingly gets drunk, sleeps with someone, then decides the next morning to claim they were raped, are an insult to women who are genuine victims of this crime. I’m not saying that this is what happened in this study (it’s really too vague to tell either way), but I do think that 1 in 12 is a highly suspicious number. That would be an epidemic. Sweden, the country with the second highest rape statistics in the world, currently has a 1 in 4 figure allegedly. I’m just skeptical that we could really be have a figure as high as 1/3 as bad as that.
But according to this writer, rather than being angry, the best course of action for feminists is to quieten down, so that men might be more comfortable with us and make the world better for us. He suggests, “You want the word about unwanted harassment* to be heard by men? Then do it through other men.” We should demurely ask for a safe environment in which to get an education and the same opportunities as men, instead of demanding them.
Just a genuine question here, but what opportunities do men have in the first world that women don’t? Genuinely, I would like to know. If there really are opportunities that we have, but women don’t, then tell us what they are so we can work on fixing the issue.
The subtext is that no one is going to listen to an angry (one notch below “hysterical”) woman. Excuse me while my head explodes.
Anger is one thing. Whining is another. Nobody likes to listen to whining.
During my couch-based weekend I also watched The Hunting Ground, a chilling documentary on Netflix about not only the prevalence of campus rape at American universities, but the extent to which those universities have gone to to cover up sexual assaults in order to preserve their reputations. I would suggest that anyone seeking to question “the veracity of the concept of rape culture” – as this article does – watch it. Or read the TIME article about military sexual assault victims in the US being dishonourably discharged after filing complaints.
And yet feminists are still silent about the “rape culture” that is actually coming in to Europe as we speak.
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie closes her essay with a paragraph about “the best feminist she knows”, her brother Kene. There are a lot of wonderful male feminists. Obama is one. My boyfriend is one. My brother is one. My Dad is one – he bought me this book.
I feel like the idea that complaining about experiences of harassment openly and often might be the equivalent of “man-hating” is just harmful and dated at this point. Obviously not at all men are rapists. Can we just take that for granted and talk about what actually matters?
Yes, lets talk about what actually matters… the truth. Not hysteria and lies. Nothing but the truth.
Adichie ends by saying that “All of us, women and men, must do better”. And I can’t possibly say it any better than that.
If by “do better” you mean “blindly assume that every single thing that feminists say is true”, then I disagree. If you actually care about working towards a society in which men and women alike are treated as equals and given the respect they deserve, then I agree.
In the soon to be Zimbabwe part 2 (or South Africa as it’s currently known) a massive bitch by the name of Gillian Schutte has decided to virtue signal about how all white people are racist apparently, and that the only way to do away with racism entirely is to “do away with whiteness”. The fact that she’s white herself never seems to cross her mind or impact on her logic in anyway.
“I agree with the position of the radical Black youth of today’s struggle against whiteness. Why should they point out the ‘good whites’ or even be cognizant of the possibility that ‘not all whites are racist’,” Schutte said.
“I agree with the position of the radical white youth of today’s struggle against blackness. Why should they point out the ‘good blacks’ or even be cognizant of the possibility that ‘not all blacks are racist’,” Schutte said.
“I agree with the position of the radical secular youth of today’s struggle against Muslims. Why should they point out the ‘good Muslims’ or even be cognizant of the possibility that ‘not all Muslims are terrorists’,” Schutte said.
“I agree with the position of the radical Christian youth of today’s struggle against homosexuality. Why should they point out the ‘good gays’ or even be cognizant of the possibility that ‘not all gays are sexual deviants’,” Schutte said.
^See how bad this really sounds?
Schutte says “all whites are racist by virtue of their birth into a system of privilege based on a false construct of race, thus I say all whites are racist until whiteness is defunct”.
“Race is a false construct”
“All white people are racist”
How can all white people be racist when there is no such thing as a white race?
The activist said the only “race struggle” white people should be engaging in was the obliteration of the whiteness they were supposedly born into.
Yes white people, you don’t deserve to take any pride in your own racial heritage. It’s perfectly ok for blacks, Asians, Hispanics etc, to have racial solidarity and pride, but you don’t deserve that because your race (which doesn’t exist) is genetically evil.
“The only race struggle whites should engage in is to obliterate the whiteness they are born into … with no expectation of ‘exceptionalism’ or accolades for being a good white. As Noel Ignatiev has written – the point is not to interpret whiteness but to abolish it. Why should the neurosis of whiteness become a black person’s problem?”
Noel Ignatiev, just to remind you, was this guy here.
Meanwhile, while the Jew professor is talking about abolishing “whiteness” to prevent racism, his own ethnic kin in Israel are using DNA tests to decide who is Jewish (which is strange, because they’re only supposed to be a religion, not a race) and are sterilising black people, so they can’t reproduce and change the ethnic makeup of the country. I wonder why such a proud advocate for racial equality isn’t speaking out against the behaviour of his fellow Jews in Israel? If I didn’t know better, I would say that there is a double standard that exists for racism with white people getting picked on unfairly.
She claimed racism was found in what people did not do, thus, “the blank spaces of inaction [allegedly by “good whites”] is where the truth is found”.
It’s not enough to simply not act in a racist manner towards black people. We have to go out of our way to do more and more for them, or else we’re still racist. Instead of just getting on with our own lives in peace, and allowing them to do the same, we have to fight their battles for them, because they are helpless children who can’t do anything for themselves. We live to serve their interests and needs first and foremost.
Oh but they’re also completely equal to us in every way despite needing us to do everything for them.
“What use are good whites anyway, when 22 years later nothing much has changed for the majority of black people in SA?
Might want to blame the incompetent black morons who took control of the country the past 22 years then. They’re the majority group, and they’re the ones in power, yet they’re trying to blame white people for how things haven’t improved for black people in the country. How can it be the fault of white people, when they’re not the ones in power anymore? Why not just accept responsibility for the fact that your own people are at fault. It’s no coincidence that every single black run country (including ones that were once successful under white leadership, such as Haiti and Zimbabwe), are all failed third world hellholes. South Africa is already headingdown the same path. They can’t even maintain their powergrid, that’s how incompetent they are. But instead of accepting responsibility for their own failures, they have to try and blame it on white people.
What did the good white syndrome do to change the systemic nature of racism?
No information about this “systemic nature of racism” such as examples, or how it works. It’s just a baseless accusation.
Good whites will even learn the words to struggle songs and toyi toyi next to the oppressed – but will they give up their positions for the sake of transformation?”
What positions? Do you mean their jobs? Their homes? What exactly are you referring to? And why should they have to give anything up just to prove they aren’t racist to people who will just hate them no matter what? If they worked hard or made sacrifices to get somewhere, or even if they inherited a position of advantage from parents who did the same, why should they have to give anything up? People shouldn’t have to feel guilty about their successes.
As usual, she received a serious tongue lashing from some of her Facebook followers.
At least there’s some hope. I think we hit peak white guilt a while ago. At this point, white people are getting sick of being blamed for everyone else’s problems and failures, and every single wrong in the world. They whined too much and in doing so, have exhausted any good will and sympathy they might have once generated.
Azaad Hayat argued: “So, in the same vein of your broadening the parameters of the definition of being racist, all Jews in Israel are Zionists by virtue of their benefiting from the status quo.
I always love when the hypocrisy of the self proclaimed “chosen ones” is pointed out.
All the silent non-Nazi Germans were, similarly, Nazis during that horrendous reign…….and on and on we can go generalising and placing people into large, little categories. You are very adept at promoting racism.”
She is indeed, though she probably doesn’t see it that way, because I’m guessing she’s one of those people who believe:
“racism requires power plus prejudice. A black person can have prejudice towards white people, but they don’t have the institutional power to be racist.”
Despite the fact that in South Africa, black people do hold all the power. Plus, even if you do buy into that nonsense about racism requiring power, otherwise it’s just simply prejudice, it doesn’t explain why prejudice is not a big deal. It’s still bad.
Schutte responded: “Yes absolutely … no self-respecting Jew should have anything to do with Israel. Americans should be much more defiant against the use of drones and heinous US foreign policy too.”
Well that’s refreshing. Something I can agree with. Though it probably wasn’t the smartest thing to say. unless she’s secretly an ethnic Jew herself, I don’t think they’ll take too kindly to her saying such things.
Schutte made international headlines after exposing Judge Mabel Jansen’s views on black people being rapists last month. Jansen came under fire for saying rape was part of “black men’s culture”. She made the comments in a private conversation with Schutte‚ who is a liberal journalist and filmmaker.
Wow how could this judge make such horrible comments?
Now of course, those statistics are from America, but I can’ help but wonder if there are similar problems in South Africa, and that is where the judge’s comments are coming from. Plus I would assume that being a judge, she has probably dealt with many different criminal cases, and she might have noticed a pattern emerging regarding certain types of crimes and the demographics which commit them. Of course, observable reality doesn’t matter to people like Gillian Schutte. All that matters is the narrative, and the narrative this woman wants to push is one of white racism against black people in South Africa. People like her are sick as far as I’m concerned.
Omar S. Mateen, who killed 50 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando last night, had already been “on the radar” of US officials, and reportedly pledged allegiance to ISIL, a.k.a. the Islamic State, in a 911 call just before the attack.
They obviously weren’t watching him closely enough. You would think that a guy who is a known ISIS supporter would be monitored much more closely than he obviously was. Well actually, you would think he would be recognised for exactly what he is… an enemy of the country he was in, and would therefore not even be allowed to stay in the country at all. I guess that’s because I keep making the mistake of thinking more along the lines of saner times when Western countries weren’t trying to commit collective suicide.
Mateen had twice been identified as a “person of interest to authorities,” a senior law enforcement source told The Daily Beast. He came to the FBI’s attention in 2013 and again in 2014, though the source didn’t specify why. The FBI opened an investigation into Mateen but couldn’t find anything requiring further work, and so closed the case, according to The Daily Beast source. In a conflicting account, law enforcement officials told ABC News that Mateen was “on the radar” of officials, but not subject to a specific investigation.
I guess the radar wasn’t working too well then.
Before carrying out the attack, Mateen called 911 in Florida and swore his allegiance to the head of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, according to NBC News, which cited law-enforcement sources. A US congressman, Adam Schiff, told CNN he had been given the same information by intelligence officials.
Mateen was born in New York in 1986 to Afghan parents and was once married to a woman from New Jersey. His former wife told The Washington Post that Mateen was violent, mentally unstable, and often beat her. “He would just come home and start beating me up because the laundry wasn’t finished or something like that,” she said. The couple were married in March 2009 and formally divorced in 2011.
Again, this is just yet another example of how even many of the ones who are born and raised in Western countries don’t integrate. It isn’t just simply a short term problem of new arrivals to the West, with some of them taking time to adjust. This man was born in America and for all intents and purposes, would have been considered just another American citizen. Yet despite growing up there, his allegiance was elsewhere because Islam is simply incompatible with Western culture.
The 29-year-old worked as a professional security officer, and had a gun license to carry a firearm. He lived in Port St. Lucie, Florida, a two-hour drive from Orlando, and rented a car to drive there and carry out the attack.
Just watch as they try and blame “the gun” for what happened. Truth be told back in the day, I would have been the same myself until I really started thinking about things. Switzerland is a country with a very strong gun culture and high gun ownership, but has hardly any deaths by firearm is comparison. I think there has to be other variables to take into consideration for why America’s gun violence is so bad. I get the fact that laws relating to gun ownership are a contributing factor, but I don’t think it’s right to focus on one element, while ignoring others, just because it’s politically incorrect to look at them.
Aside from the report about Mateen’s ISIL ties, the exact motives behind his attack remain unclear,
A radical Muslim who supports ISIS? Hmm, I wonder what possible motivation he could have for attacking a nightclub full of gay people?
and it is also unclear whether he collaborated with anyone. So far, the authorities have not released any answers. Florida Democrat senator Bill Nelson has said information from intelligence sources suggest “a link to Islamic radicalism… some kind of connection to ISIS,” a.k.a ISIL. However, Florida congressman Alan Grayson said there was currently no evidence that Mateen had outside help.
He was probably just mentally ill, and was driven to kill these people because of all the racism he experienced from evil white Americans. He’s the real victim here, not all those people he killed. The real guilty party is every single white person in America who oppressed him with their white privilege. We should probably just bring in millions of more people from the Middle East to America, to overrun those racist white supremacists, so that they won’t be able to oppress people like Omar in vague, unspecified ways anymore.
Am I doing it right mainstream media?
One possibility is that Mateen was a lone wolf inspired by radical Islam but not working directly with any terrorist groups.
Which again is even worse. They don’t even need to be part of a terrorist organisation. They can just go out and commit terrorism by themselves. I wonder how many more “lone wolves” like this guy are currently in America and Europe just biding their time until they’re ready to act? It is utter insanity that we have allowed this to happen. What was the point in allowing millions of people with cultural beliefs entirely incompatible with our own, to come in to our countries without forcing them to integrate?
As I’ve tried to explain time and time again, borders exist for a reason. It’s not that European people just happened to find land with magical first world generating air and soil and set up borders at the points were this air and soil stopped. It’s not as if they wanted to keep out non-white people simply because they’re evil racists who didn’t want to share this first world air and soil with them, due to a hatred towards the colour of their skin.
Different people have different cultures, and different cultures result in different types of societies. Some cultures (ie. European ones) are able to create first world living standards, and anywhere they bring their cultures (such as America, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand), they create the same living standards. Other cultures (such as Muslim cultures) are entirely different from European ones, and therefore create different (and in my view, inferior) living standards.
When two or more cultures came in to contact throughout history, conflict was inevitable because of their differences. All groups want to live in a society that reflect their culture. For this reason, borders were set up so that each group could live among their own and live under their own cultural norms. Therefore, having differing cultural groups existing within the same borders, will just result in conflict as each side struggles to live under their own cultural norms without interference from others.
THIS IS WHY MULTICULTURALISM DOESN’T AND WILL NEVER EVER WORK!!!!
Mir Seddique, Mateen’s father told NBC News that “this had nothing to do with religion.”
He said it might have been because Mateen had seen two men kissing in Miami a couple of months earlier in front of his wife and son, and became angry.
But his anger has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. Sure, he has pledged his allegiance to ISIS, and sure, ISIS are opposed to homosexuality because of their religious beliefs, but it has absolutely nothing to do with his religious beliefs. It just made him angry for no actual reason.
Seriously this is what we’ve done to ourselves. It’s our own fault. We’re so arrogant to think that we could create a Utopian society where everyone lives together in peace that we’ve put plenty of our own in danger rather than accepting the evidence that’s right in front of us. It just won’t ever work. Women, children, and now gay people. Is it really worth it? Do we really need to see more and more of our own pay the price just to prove that we aren’t racist?
Do we really fear that word more than the potential loss of our way of life, and the literal loss of life? Is that how bad it has gotten?
Personally, I hope it hasn’t gotten that bad. And if it hasn’t, and people realise that self preservation trumps (no pun intended) not being called names, then this Omar Mateen may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.