France is finished.

There are a lot of countries in the Western world competing in the race to be the first to commit national suicide. There’s the United Kingdom. There’s Belgium. There’s Germany. There’s Canada. Then of course, there’s my own personal pick to win, Sweden. However there are occasionally times when I question if Sweden really is the front-runner in the race. Don’t get me wrong, that doesn’t happen very often. Usually whenever I start to doubt Sweden’s commitment to destroying itself the quickest, they manage to outdo themselves, and remind me as to why they’re my pick. However, after reading this latest story from France, another top contender in this race, I’m really considering the possibility that I may have put my money on them to win (if you can really call it “winning”) instead.

if_charles_martel_was_a_leftist_by_rochambeaufr-d9p70r6
The real Charles Martel must be spinning in his grave, seeing what has become of his descendants, in the land he fought to protect.

From Israel National News

A French professor has suggested creating a Muslim state within France in order to prevent a civil war, reports Westmonster.

This is basically a surrender, exactly what the French are infamous for. He’s outright admitting that the multicultural plan has failed miserably, by making this statement.

Professor Christian de Moliner admits that an independent society has formed within France, which he described as: “A branch that wants to settle their lives on religious values and is fundamentally opposed to the liberal consensus on which our country was founded.

And the obvious answer to this problem would be to discontinue immigration from the kinds of people who make up this “independent society”, and then round up the ones already in the country, and deport them to a country better suited for their ideology. But of course we can’t do that, or people might call us names, and as we all know, being called names is far worse than having our homelands stolen from us.

Burka-Barbarians
If you think people like this have no place in France, you’re a “racist”.

“We can never convert the 30% of Muslims who demand the introduction of sharia law to the merits of our democracy and secularism.

“But we also can’t deport them to a country which practices Sharia law, because that would be barbaric.”

aca60c9b26f0ee75816290e302e6a407
It would be wrong to send people who want Sharia law, to a country which has Sharia law, as by an astonishing coincidence, these countries are all shitholes. The only solution would be to create a Sharia state within our own country, so that they could have Sharia law here.

“We are now allowing segregation to take place that does not say its name. Rather than veil the face or adopt unimaginable measures in democracy (remigration, forced evictions of the most radical), why not establish a dual system of law in France?”

He literally said that deporting cultural aliens back to their countries of origin, no matter how radical they are in their beliefs, is “unimaginable”. Can you see why I’m seriously considering that France may be overtaking Sweden in this race to national suicide?

De Moliner writes that Emmanuel Macron’s Presidential election victory will not solve the problems, but will only postpone them.

Should have voted for Le Pen when you had the chance.

20170826_euc522
LOL, his approval rating is dropping even quicker than Hollande’s did in the same amount of time. You remember Hollande, right? That was the guy who had a 4% approval rating by the end of his term.

“We will never be able to eradicate the radical Islamism,” he says, adding: “While we are not yet at open war, the faithful of the Prophet are already regrouping in areas sometimes governed by special rules.”

They’re waiting for the demographic balance to shift in their favour, before they go to open war. Seeing as their birthrates are higher than that of the native French population, it’s only a matter of time. Once there are enough of them, the open war will begin.

His “solution” is to create a “state inspired by colonial Algeria and Mayotte of the twentieth century: one territory, one government, but two peoples: the French with the usual laws and Muslims with Qur’anic status (but only for those who choose it).

Brilliant idea. Model your modern, democratic, technologically advanced society, on a backward colony from a century ago.

“The latter will have the right to vote unlike the natives of colonial Algeria, but they will apply Sharia in everyday life, to regulate matrimonial laws (which will legalize polygamy) and inheritance.

“They will no longer apply to French judges for disputes between Muslims, but to Qadis. On the other hand, conflicts between Christians and believers will remain the responsibility of ordinary courts.

It’s not just “multiculturalism” now, but “multilegalism” as well. One law for the French. Another law for the Muslim invaders. I wonder will they go ahead and legalise the right for them to throw gay people off of roofs and take sex slaves, seeing as this would be in line with their beliefs?

dmvidpics-2016-04-07-at-19-43-20.png
Picture from the Eiffel tower circa 2020.

“This system would involve schools or hospitals reserved for believers and therefore the creation of local committees that will manage them independently. A council of ulemas will fix the religious law, but the autonomy will stop there,” de Moliner hopes.

“It is obviously out of the question that an embryonic Muslim government is settling in France.

“But instead of doing the sensible thing of nipping it in the bud by removing these people before they have the chance to take over, we’re just going to willingly surrender a large chunk of our territory to them. Anything else would be wrong.”

“This system worked without too many problems from 1890 to 1940 in Algeria.”

Isn’t that great, French people? Instead of living in 21st century France, you get to live in 1890-1940 Algeria instead. Doesn’t that sound exciting?

14584790389_c720b3429c_b

463928873.jpg

ca2e5f866e71e9b88bf4f3f9258c5539--old-city-eye-art

SCVIEW490249

market-scene-sidi-okba-algeria-photochrome-print-circa-1900-FW6AE2.jpg

street-scene-in-tolga-biskra-province-algeria-date-circa-1920-K07R7J

RIP France.

Advertisements

“It’s racist for white people to mate with each other.”

DKpgKiQWAAAJaPD

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. All this talk about “white privilege”, “white supremacy”, “white racism”, etc., it isn’t motivated by a desire for justice or equality, on the part of those who speak about it. It’s purely based on a vicious and genocidal hatred towards us. They don’t want to be equals with us. They want to exterminate us, and we’ve seen perfect examples of the future in store for us in Zimbabwe since Mugabe came to power, South Africa post-apartheid, and Haiti back in 1804.

revolution-1.gif
This is what they actually want.

And then after they’ve exterminated us and there is none of us left, they’ll be standing on our graves, cursing the fact that we ever existed at all. We only have two possible options. Total victory, or total annihilation. There is no middle ground. There is no compromise. How can we possibly expect to find common ground with an enemy that wants nothing less than our complete destruction?

white-genocide-art-e1495285729759
This is an actual piece of “art” that was celebrated.

For a long time, this enemy was subtle. We’ve spent the last few decades grovelling for forgiveness for imaginary crimes, all while they have taken more and more ground in their war against us. We couldn’t see the truth because we were too busy wallowing in our own guilt and desperately trying to make amends. “Yes take my ancestral homeland. Take my resources. Blow up my countrymen. Rape my daughter. Just please don’t call me racist”, and for a long time this actually worked. However, they gradually pushed too far, too fast, and as the Brexit result, the Trump election victory, and the rising popularity of “far right” political parties all over Europe has shown, a backlash has been happening. Now our enemy is in panic mode, the mask has slipped, and rather than maintaining composure and continuing to play the long-game, they’re lashing out, and exposing themselves as the vicious, genocidal maniacs that they always were.

From New York Post

A City University of New York sociology professor reportedly said in a tweetstorm last week that “the white-nuclear family” promotes racism, prompting a backlash on social media.

There you go. This woman literally made the claim that the “white-nuclear family promotes racism”. In other words, she’s saying it’s wrong for white people to marry other white people and to have white children together, because this is racist. She’s literally saying that our continued existence is racist. Therefore is it not obvious what the solution is? We have to stop existing in order to put an end to racism.

But of course, “white genocide” is just a crazy, far right conspiracy theory, that only far-right, Neo-Nazi, white supremacists, believe in. It doesn’t matter that it’s blatantly out in the open. It’s still just a crazy conspiracy theory.

C0lD8DPUUAAGfe0
“Just because this is actually all happening, doesn’t mean that white genocide is real.” ~ The logic we’re expected to believe.

Jessie Daniels, described as an expert on “the Internet manifestations of racism” on her CUNY page, infuriated social media users after reportedly saying that white families promote racism by default.

They misspelled “CUNT page”.

111912_Jessie_Daniels
Jessie Daniels. Strange, she looks “white” to me. Why would this “white” woman, have such an attitude towards her “fellow white people”? Hmm, this seems suspicious.

The professor began her argument saying she learned that “the white-nuclear family is one of the most powerful forces supporting white supremacy,” adding that that families “reproducing white children” are “part of the problem” as they facilitate white supremacy in the country, Campus Reform reported.

White people having children promotes white supremacy. Therefore white people need to stop having children, or if they must, they should make a point of having mixed race children only. Who cares if the person they fall in love with is another white person? Who cares if they want to have children who look like them? They have to either forego reproduction, or mate with people of other races, or else Jessie Daniels will call them racist. Of course, it’s still perfectly acceptable for black people to have black children, Asian people to have Asian children, Latino people to have Latino children, etc. This rule only applies to white people.

She reportedly tweeted: “I mean, if you’re a white person who says they’re engaged in dismantling white supremacy but … you’re forming a white family (and) reproducing white children that ‘you want the best for’ – how is that helping [and] not part of the problem?”

I would ask how is it causing a problem, but we all know that we won’t actually get an answer to that question, because then she would have to admit the truth, which is that as far as she is concerned, white people existing at all is the problem.

She reportedly ended her arguement suggesting that “white people” should confront their racism and stop perpetuating inequality by leaving their homes for their children.

“Until white people are ready to confront their own family’s racism (and) participation in systemic white supremacy, it’s not getting dismantled,” she wrote. “Beyond just calling out interpersonal racism, white people who want to be engaged in the work need to ask themselves about housing wealth.”

She added: “White people: do you own your home? When you die, where’s wealth in that house going? If it’s to your children, you’re reproducing (inequality).”

Yes you horrible white people. How dare you work hard, make responsible decisions, and end up owning a home of your own? It doesn’t matter how you obtained the wealth to own that home. The fact that you own it at all is an example of “inequality”. You have no right to pass that home that you worked hard to buy, on to your own children. That wealth needs to be shared with minorities who have less, even if they only have less wealth because of their own laziness, stupidity, and general incompetence.

Don’t worry ma’am. We’ll find some guilt ridden white sucker to leave their hard-earned wealth to you, instead of their own children.

The professor locked her account in response to the criticism. Fox News reached out to the professor and the university early Tuesday and did not receive an immediate response.

She obviously wasn’t prepared to defend her statements. People like this aren’t used to talking to people. They’re used to talking at people, and when people start talking back, they can’t handle it.

Anyway, as I was saying before, I just can’t understand this mentality. Why would a “white” woman say such vicious and hateful things towards other white people? It just makes no sense to me that a “white” person could possibly hate their own race so much, to the point that they would like to see them go extinct. What could possibly be the explan…

J4tIlgB
Oh. Why am I not surprised?

EVERY!!!

Tg8o1o0.png

SINGLE!!!

fw1

TIME!!!!

6xH2f7.jpg

Rdc3jcV

Bread and circuses… and politics.

Juvenal.jpg

We live in a decaying society. All over the Western world, economic prospects are bleak. Good jobs, which pay a decent wage, and which are fulfilling to do, are few and far between, with rapidly increasing automation only going to make this even worse as time goes by. Affordable housing is an unobtainable fantasy for most young people these days. In Europe, the Barbarians are at our gates, and are actually being welcomed in with open arms, predictable consequences for doing so be damned. In America, racial tensions are the worst they’ve been in almost half a century. Terrorist attacks are happening so regularly, that they barely get any attention anymore, unless they have an exceptionally high body count. Gender relations are completely out of whack, with divorces on the rise, an inability for people to make relationships work at all, and with many men just giving up on them entirely, turning to pornography, masturbation, and soon, sex robots, as an alternative. We live in an absolute nightmare.

On some level, most people know that things aren’t right, and look for distractions from it all. This is nothing unusual, and has been a pretty common occurrence in societies on the verge of collapse. The Romans had a term for it, “Bread and Circuses”.  Basically, the Romans had figured out that as long as the people weren’t going hungry, and had some form of entertainment to take their minds off of things, that they could be appeased, and the real problems facing the empire would be ignored. Of course ignoring the problems doesn’t make them go away, so Rome eventually collapsed under their weight, circa 476 AD.

83d3aa8fb30a403fae8356bc9687345c
The rise of Christianity certainly didn’t help.

Things really aren’t that much different today. Society is going to hell, but people have plenty of “circuses” to keep them pacified. Movies, TV, professional sports, social media, videogames, etc., etc., all fulfill this role in the modern world. However, I’ve noticed a very interesting phenomenon that has been taking place in recent years. The whole point of the circuses is to distract people from the problems that are all around them, a temporary respite from them, if you will.

In other words, they’re supposed to be a safe haven from, not a reminder of these problems, because if they remind people of the problems, they lose all effectiveness as a distraction from them. And that’s exactly what we’re seeing happening these days. The problems people are trying to distract themselves from, are becoming conflated with the distractions themselves.

Lets take sports as our first example, specifically, the NFL in America. As I already mentioned, professional sports are a perfect example of the modern equivalent to the Roman games, and if anything, are probably the closest thing to them. The NFL was a very popular distraction for many Americans from the everyday problems that they face, or at least they were until…

160916164535-05-nfl-players-protest-super-169.jpg
…this.

So for those who are unaware, the NFL is currently being plagued by massive and very public controversy. Many black players are choosing to kneel, rather than standing in respect when the national anthem is being played. Their reason for doing this is to protest against alleged racial injustices that black people supposedly face in America. This of course serves as a reminder of the problem that is America’s increasingly poor race relations, a problem that people would rather distract themselves from. So can you imagine how this must look to white NFL fans who see this happening? They’re ordinary, working class people, dealing with problems of their own, that they wish to distract themselves from, and they turn on the TV and see a bunch of millionaires, paid to play a sport they probably enjoy playing anyway, whining about how oppressed they are, and how privileged their audience is. How do you suppose that has gone down with the audience?

nfl
Yep

So the NFL has actually gone from being America’s most popular sport, to its least popular, directly as a result of these protests. People didn’t watch the NFL to be lectured to, and to be reminded about the problems in their society. They watched it as a distraction, and now that that distraction is gone, they’re tuning out instead.

But hey, it’s not just the NFL that is failing in its duty as a distraction for the masses. There’s plenty of other forms of entertainment doing the same thing. Look at late night, comedian, talk show hosts like Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, John Oliver, etc. Ever since Trump came along, he has pretty much made up the entirety of their acts. Now I’m not saying that it’s anything unusual for comedians to take shots at political figures, and I certainly don’t think that Trump should be exempt from their ridicule. There’s definitely a lot of material to work with there. The problem is, they aren’t simply mocking Trump himself. They’re mocking his base, his supporters, the people who voted for him. That’s 63 MILLION people that they’re attacking. It’s quite possible that many of these 63 million people were at one point, viewers of one or more of these comedians. Do you think they’re still fans now after having been labeled as “racists”, “misogynists”, “dumb rednecks” etc., simply for voting for what they felt was the better choice for themselves and their families? I would be shocked if they are.

Why would any of these people tune in to distract themselves from the problems in their lives, if they know they’re just going to be mocked and insulted by the hosts? What is the benefit to them? There are two other notable examples of entertainment media that I can think of off the top of my head, which are having similar problems. Video games, and comics.

Long considered refuges for geeks and nerds, in the western world at least, video games and comics have both generally been most popular with males, particularly white ones. Most of the most popular super-heroes have historically been white males and this makes sense when you consider the fact that most of them were created in America, back when America was still somewhere between 85 and 90 percent white. That’s not to say that there hasn’t been female and racial minority super-heroes as as well, but the most popular ones of all, such as Batman, Superman, Spider-man, Iron Man, Captain America, etc., have all been white men. Similarly, popular video-games have usually had white male protagonists, because these are more relatable to the biggest target market, but again, plenty of exceptions exist.

In recent years however, there have been attacks on these two industries from outside. People who aren’t even fans of them have whined about how “noninclusive” “racist” and “sexist” they are, and have demanded changes to better suit their own tastes. One of the two big comic publishers, Marvel, has done exactly that. Rather than do the sensible thing of better promoting their existing female and racial minority characters, or creating brand new heroes altogether, they took the approach of taking their most beloved and popular characters, with decades of history and reader attachment, and either replaced them, or made drastic changes to them. Lets take a look at some of these changes that they’ve made the past few years.

Thor.0.0-970x545.jpg
They’ve replaced Thor with a woman.
150904-chu-asian-hulk-tease_ypc9xv.jpg
They’ve replaced the white man “Bruce Banner” with an Asian man who becomes the Hulk.
rs_1024x759-140717041204-1024-captainamerica-samwilson-jc
They made C or D List black superhero, Falcon into the new Captain America, while turning the original white Captain America into a Nazi, a complete bastardisation of his character.
Invincible-Iron-Man-1-Featured
They’ve replaced Iron Man with a black teenage girl.
all_new_wolverine_1
They killed off Wolverine and replaced him with his daughter, X-23.
o-ICEMAN-GAY-facebook
They revealed that perpetual womaniser, Bobby “Ice-Man” Drake, is  actually gay, in the worst way possible.
milesmorales.0
They created a half black, half Latino, Spider-Man, Miles Morales. This one wasn’t so obnoxious, because it was done years before the others, and they didn’t have him replace the original Spider-Man in the process. It’s just seems weird having more than one of them at the same time.

That’s just off the top of my head. These changes have not been well received by long time Marvel fans, and Marvel is aware of this. They try to frame it as if the fans are just a bunch of bigots who can’t accept diversity, but is this really the case? Nobody had any problems with racial minority characters such as Black Panther or Blade, nor did they have any problems with the many female super-heroes that have appeared on teams like the X-Men or the Avengers over the years. Over at their rivals, DC, nobody ever had a problem with Wonder Woman, the black Green Lantern, John Stewart, or the gay super-hero, Midnighter. Diversity was never the problem, because diversity has always existed to some extent in comics. The problem is that they’re replacing beloved and popular characters that fans are emotionally invested in, and then making derogatory comments about the fans when they speak out against it. And sure enough, their sales have declined, and they’re blaming the fans, rather than themselves for this.

With regards to videogames, there’s too much for me to even cover. I’d just suggest reading up on the “Gamergate Controversy”  to get a superficial idea of what’s been happening there. Of course, there’s a lot more to the story than what is being reported there. There’s always the Encylopedia Dramatica article on the topic, if you want to get the other side of the story.

Seeing this infestation of politics, social conflicts, and other problems into what are supposed to be distractions from these issues could have an interesting effect on how people react. The whole reason for bread and circuses is to pacify the masses so that they don’t pay attention to actual problems, and demand real solutions to them. But if these distractions stop working, and people no longer feel that they have a safe haven from these problems, then what are they supposed to do? How can they be kept pacified? Could we perhaps be on the verge of seeing a big awakening soon? I sure hope so.

“Preschools are too ‘heteronormative'”

I was always under the impression that the purpose of preschools, was to teach children how to socialise and interact with other children. Turns out I was wrong. The real purpose of them is to be a sort of “reverse conversion therapy”, where heterosexual kids are brainwashed into becoming LGBT.

From Campus Reform

A University of Michigan instructor recently claimed that preschool classrooms are rife with “heteronormativity” that perpetuates “inequalities related to gender.”

Now just watch as she fails to back this up with any actual meaningful points, instead just relying on buzzwords and personal opinions.

Heidi M. Gansen, a Ph.D. student who teaches sociology at UMich, advanced these claims in a July 14 article that examines the prevalence of “heteronormativity” in a set of nine Michigan preschool classrooms she visited.

And this is why the value of a college education keeps on declining. The fact that a deranged Marxist ideologue like this woman is actually paid to teach people, is absolutely hilarious. Or at least, it would be hilarious, if it wasn’t so tragic. To any unfortunate student who was naive enough to sign up for this class, I just want to wish you good luck trying to pay off your tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt, especially while working at the one job you’re likely to get, with a qualification such as this.

ly.jpg
“Do you want fries with that?”

Defining “heteronormativity” as a culture in which “heterosexuality is always assumed, expected, ordinary, and privileged,” Gansen then argues that the issue is especially important to her research because preschools contribute to the “reproduction of inequalities pertaining to gender and sexuality,” such as gender roles and gendered feelings.

Does all that sound like a bunch of nonsensical, confusing, gibberish to you? If so, then good, that’s exactly the point. It’s supposed to be confusing for the average person to comprehend what this all even means. Basically, this woman is complaining that heterosexuality is presumed to be the “norm” in society, just because the vast majority of people, happen to be heterosexual. Because most people happen to be heterosexual, most other people will naturally presume that others are heterosexual, because statistically speaking, about 96% of people, will be, unless they’re specifically told otherwise. However, she seems to think that this way of interacting with one another marginalises the remaining 4% who aren’t, and therefore, we need to change our natural behaviour, and act as if there’s a 50/50 split between gay and straight people.

“Preschool is a good place to begin this examination, because practices that facilitate heteronormativity in classrooms become more engrained in later years of schooling,” she explains.

It’s a good place to begin the examination, because the best way to brainwash people into accepting your deranged world view, is to target them when they’re young, and their brains aren’t fully developed yet. That’s what it’s really all about. She wants to perpetuate her Cultural Marxist bollocksology, and who better to promote it to than young kids who haven’t yet developed the ability to think critically?

He-Alone-Who-Owns-The-Youth-Gains-The-Future-Adolf-Hitler.jpg

Accordingly, Gansen spent ten months observing childhood behavior at a set of nine Michigan preschools, finding numerous ways in which heterosexuality is “produced” and “enforced” by students and teachers.

Wait, I’m confused. Heterosexuality is “produced” now? But I was under the impression that one of the leading arguments of the LGBT rights lobby, was that you’re “born with your sexuality”, and that you can’t choose or change it. So I don’t understand how she can then make the claim that these teachers are “producing heterosexuality”.

In all seriousness, I’m of the believe that sexuality is determined by a mixture of nurture and nature, rather than just one or the other. I’ve heard it suggested before that both homosexuality and transgenderism is similar to diabetes, in that there’s a “Type 1” and a “Type 2”.

injection_2227502b.jpg
No don’t worry, I’m not suggesting that we can start injecting gay people with insulin, in order to make them straight.

Much like with diabetes, someone with type 1 homosexuality or transgenderism, will be someone who was just born that way. I do believe that there are people who are just naturally born to be gay or transgender, and nothing in the environment will change that. However, just like how people get type 2 diabetes, due to their life experiences, I believe that life experiences in the time before puberty (and by extension, before sexuality has developed) can impact how a person’s sexuality develops. Just look at this study for example:

“Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. “

Look at the variance there. 46% of gay men interviewed for the study, claimed to experience homosexual molestation as a child, compared to just 7% of straight men, and there’s a similar variance between the experiences of lesbians and straight women. When looking at information like that, is it really hard to consider the possibility that having such experiences before they reached adolescence, and while their brains were still developing, could have warped their perceptions of sexuality somewhat. As I’ve said, I’m by no means suggesting that every single gay person is someone who was “turned gay from molestation” as a child, as I do believe that plenty of gay people are just born that way, but it’s still something that needs to be acknowledged.

And as for transgenderism, well consider this. In the most gender equal country on the planet, Sweden, the number of children looking to undergo sex changes is apparently doubling each year.  Supporters will claim the numbers actually aren’t any higher than they ever were before, but it’s just less taboo now to go public about it, but I’m too cynical to agree. Personally, I believe that there has always existed a very tiny minority of people with gender dysphoria (the type 1s), but what we’re now seeing is a drastic increase in the type 2s, as a result of campaigns to normalise and encourage it. The fact that a country like Sweden of all places, is seeing this increase, only convinces me more that this increase is really a result of environmental stimuli and information that children are being exposed to, while they’re still growing and their brains are still developing.

Anyway, you might be wondering why I went off on that tangent about type 1 and type 2 LGBT people. Well, it connects back to this woman’s comments about schools “producing heterosexuality”. You see, despite the claims they make that all LGBT people are just “born that way”, I believe that they actually know damn well that this isn’t always the case. This woman is angry at schools for “producing heterosexuality”, because she knows that in some cases at least, it is possible to produce homosexuality and transgenderism, and for her own reasons, she wants to encourage that to happen. What her reasons are, I can only speculate. One thing I am certain of however, is that when she complains about “heteronormativity”, it isn’t because she cares about the well-being of any LGBT children.

Playing “house,” for instance, is one area in which Gansen observed “heteronormativity” in the in the preschool setting, noting that only girls would imitate mothers while only boys would play fathers.

Wow. Can you even begin to comprehend? That’s so sick and twisted. Girls role-playing as mothers and boys role-playing as fathers. This is so unfair, because it denies the existence of the millions of girls who become fathers, and the millions of boys who become mothers. Oh wait, I forgot. In real life, “father” is an exclusively male term, and “mother” is an exclusively female term, so that never actually happens.

AAEAAQAAAAAAAAknAAAAJDNkYWUwNTRkLTBlMTYtNDU2NS1iNWJhLTk0ZjUxNWEyYzNmNw.jpg
A little girl pretending to be a mother, and a little boy pretending to be a father. Remember when this would have been considered cute and innocent, rather than something to be attacked?

If a girl asked to be the husband of the household, she would be quickly rebuffed by her peers, Gansen observed, lamenting that “children did not allow cross-gender roles.”

Girls can’t be husbands in real life. Get over it. Besides, while you’re complaining about this, did it ever once occur to you, to consider the feelings of the boy in this scenario? Maybe he doesn’t want to play the wife, and why should he be forced to?

Gansen also cited the reading of “traditional fairy tales,”

Which generations of children grew up hearing, and turned out fine…

engaging in “heteronormative play,”

Which generations of children grew up playing, and turned out fine…

and teachers suggesting that a boy has a “crush” on a girl as other ways in which gender-roles are perpetuated.

Maybe the boy does have a crush on the girl. Seriously, what’s the fucking problem here? These people are obsessed. I can guarantee that if the boy had a crush on another boy, this woman would be celebrating it. It’s just like with their weird desire to completely reverse all  gender norms. If a woman chooses the role of a housewife, she’s attacked for doing so. If a man becomes a househusband, it’s celebrated. If a man is highly ambitious and aggressively competitive, he has “toxic masculinity”. If a woman is highly ambitious and aggressively competitive, she’s a “strong, confident woman”. Essentially, men are pathologised for acting like traditional men, women are pathologised for acting like traditional women, but both men and women are celebrated for acting like the traditional version of the opposite gender.

d8a71cab0be179d14afb2948cbfcc7c6
Progress

Meanwhile, teachers apparently make similar mistakes when they refer to “same-gender signs of affection or homosocial behaviors as friendly” as opposed to romantic, with Gansen arguing that  the teacher’s interpretation of the friendship makes no concession for the fact that some students might be gay or queer.

See what I mean? It’s wrong for a teacher to think that a boy has a crush on a girl, but if the teacher fails to assume that a boy has a crush on his male friend, that’s also wrong.

As a solution, Gansen concludes by outlining “disruptive” approaches teachers can take, which include talking about the legality of gay marriage and showing “acceptance” when students participate in “actions that interrupt heteronormativity.”

A “solution” to a problem nobody ever asked to be solved.

Gansen finishes by complaining that even in the preschools with the most progressive teachers of all the ones she observed, “children still engaged in heteronormative practices with peers,” adding that “these findings demonstrate the importance of teachers actively working to disrupt heteronormativity, which is already ingrained in children by ages 3 to 5.”

Wow if that’s really the case, then how are there any gay people in the world at all?

Campus Reform reached out to Gansen for additional comment on her research, but did not receive a response in time for publication.

Of course not. People like this want to “talk at” us, rather than “talk to”. There’s no point even engaging with her. She should just be ridiculed.

A small sample of what we’re up against: Part 4

In case it isn’t obvious, I’m suffering from a very severe case of writer’s block at the moment. I guess I’m just getting fed up constantly writing about the same kinds of insanity happening over and over again. I feel as if I’m just covering the same ground with every post, and that really effects my motivation to write anything.

Nevertheless, I do still want to keep making posts, as I enjoy doing this blog, so today I’m going to do what I always do, whenever I’m going through a drought of content. I’m going to post another batch of content that I’ve taken from the TumblrInAction reddit board, just to give you an insight into the kind of insanity that we’re dealing with in this world. If you want to see my previous posts on this topic, please click here, to see part 3, and from there, you can find the links to parts 1 and 2.

Anyway, enjoy…

_8DhQpJXFf1aWP07X1IuH3hClSXm9ckDpuWVe0uQ_qU.png
Kale is indigenous to Europe by the way, meaning white people were eating it long before blacks. Though really, does that even matter? This idiot is literally dictating to an entire race, what they can eat.
3yXvSN3LCcuyWGvd7Sv33QRklL9IFA-o2GlFMY8z8yA.png
Crazy person trying to encourage a child to become just as crazy as they are.  Remember when this would have been considered child abuse?
7ONlEblCAsIcu6u2icNgjaX4oHojO5Ia704WOsVDpNM.png
The only reason why it would collapse, is because the Jews control most of America, including their media, academia, and financial systems, and would almost certainly sabotage them on purpose, on their way out.
61bba30f00cf4ed694644c227a5eb9ec.jpg
This is an actual presentation that a black student is giving in college. Imagine the outrage, if a white student had a similar presentation about black people. But yeah, white people are the privileged ones.
7933bd745e73480cbe97b2bee8c3232c.jpg
How are these statements related in any way?
c4cf92284ee6477292cbe2c9462efae8.jpg
Whites are the most violent, even though blacks, Arabs, and Hispanics all commit more violent crime than whites do, and white majority countries are so well run, that all these other groups flock by the millions to live in them. If white people are so violent, why do non-white people want to live in our countries so badly?
cHfuT0K.jpg
Can anyone explain why exactly it is necessary to change Santa’s race? What is the benefit of doing so? What is the point? How does it even make sense, considering the fact that Santa is based on the real historical figure, St Nicholas, a white man?
cLvnab1.jpg
Wow, I guess all those doctors and scientists were wrong. Also, I guess it’s just a coincidence that it’s mainly fat people who get type 2 diabetes. Thank you anonymous tumblr user, for telling us the truth.
E4g1LAG
“Don’t generalise all Muslims, based on the actions of a minority of them.” *proceeds to unfairly generalise all cops, all Americans, and all white people*
eoQfNVB.png
According to this person’s logic, roughly half of her fellow citizens are racists and misogynists. How will she ever survive there, if that’s the case? she should probably emigrate to Trudeau’s Canada instead.
erSyNh0NsIJHG5gwWoTZgInTWHiDYdCEPC_O6fOYLlU
This is why China and India are gradually catching up with the West. How can we ever be expected to compete in the world, if THIS is the sort of thing that people are studying at college?This person is probably even less employable than someone with no college education at all, and probably tens of thousands of dollars in debt as well.
ETm1Xsoi8p6uWXkIehpeW4Ni5Gm__-RGGhhRcckrJF0.png
Are we going to get an explanation as to why this is so? no, of course not.
f3e3f6h.png
Being called by the name on their birth cert, and the name that they are probably registered with the college by, makes them feel unsafe. How can a person this fragile be expected to function in the real world? How will they handle it, when the Muslims are getting ready to throw them off the top of a building, if hearing their own name is enough to make them feel unsafe?
f6425b0ee9174aca9731ff9f438ae2df.jpg
Even if you by into the idea that “gender” and “sex” are two different things, it doesn’t change the fact that “male/female”, “men/women”, “boy/girl” are more often used to refer to a person’s biological sex, rather than their subjective gender identity. It has always been this way. So in other words, if you feel like you’re a woman, despite being born in the body of a biological male, that’s your choice and you can refer to yourself as you wish. However, you don’t get the right to dictate how others (the majority, I might add) perceive reality, so if they choose to use these words in reference to a person’s biological sex, that’s their choice.
Gb74vD8.png
Or it’s just common courtesy that when you’re in a different country, that you make an effort to learn the language of the local people, so you can communicate with them. Nobody forced these non-English speakers, to come live in an English speaking country. They made a choice, and there are consequences of making that choice. Also, what a racist statement you’ve just made. It’s not just “people of colour” who have to learn English as a second language in America. White people from non-English speaking countries do too.
gDxpMH1
The internet is full of this by the way. Pathetic weaklings, self diagnosing themselves with PTSD for example, because a white male held a door open for them, and this “blatant act of sexism” triggered them. Or morbidy obese fatasses diagnosing themselves with an underactive thyroid, when really, they’re just lazy and greedy.
GqbWDdo.png
Being fit isn’t a privilege. It takes hard work and discipline to be fit.  This woman could be fit too, if she hit the gym, and ate a bit less. Instead of doing this, she chooses to attack someone else who has, and act as if she is the victim. I don’t know if she actually is a hypocrite, but it sure looks as if she might well be a hippo-crite 😛
HDlwQJh.png
“Stuff black people like: Rap music. Fried chicken. Watermel…” “OMG SHUT THE FUCK UP RACIST!!!! HOW DARE YOU GENERALISE A WHOLE RACE LIKE THAT?!?!?!?”
Hmp9EzS.png
No it’s because when they see them with their significant other, they know that they’re off the market. When they see them by themselves, there is a possibility that they might be single, and seeing as men are the ones expected to make the first move in human courtship, it’s nothing unusual for them to at least try their luck.
HSgdE6.png
Feeling guilty about their “white male privilege”. Lives in New York. I’m betting this guy was a Jew.

Anyway, that’s it for now, but I can assure you, there will be a part 5 at some stage.

It’s offensive now to say breastfeeding is natural.

gUKQYEq.jpg
It’s honestly impossible to tell anymore.

Just when I think there is nothing in this world that is ridiculous enough to leave me feeling dumbfounded anymore, a story like this comes out and manages to prove me wrong.

From Heatstreet

It’s “ethically inappropriate” for government and medical organizations to describe breastfeeding as “natural” because the term enforces rigid notions about gender roles, claims a new study in Pediatrics.

I just… I can’t even… just what the fuck have I just read here?

article-2384955-1B28DF01000005DC-661_634x615
This poor woman has no idea just how oppressed she is by doing this. Breastfeeding was actually invented by the patriarchy (white men specifically) in order to enforce oppressive gender roles. 

“Coupling nature with motherhood… can inadvertently support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family (for example, that women should be the primary caretaker,” the study says.

No you fucking moron, people say that “breastfeeding is natural”, because it’s one of the most natural things in the world. All female mammals (humans included) have mammary glands that produce milk which they use to feed their young. Male mammals (again, humans included) don’t have this ability. If it’s natural for every other mammal to do this, then what makes humans the exception? Where did this arrogant view come from, that somehow nature doesn’t apply to humans?

The study notes that in recent years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the World Health Organization, and several state departments of health have all promoted breastfeeding over bottle-feeding, using the term “natural.”

BECAUSE IT IS FUCKING NATURAL!!!!

“Referencing the ‘natural’ in breastfeeding promotion… may inadvertently endorse a set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate,” the study says.

Yeah, could you imagine? It might offend certain people to make statements like this.

3387F5F300000578-3558208-image-m-18_1461611942485.jpg
You evil hate filled bigots. This woman here doesn’t have the ability to breastfeed, because she was “assigned male” at birth. By saying that breastfeeding is natural, you run the risk of hurting her feelings, and as we all know, the feelings of a tiny insignificant minority, are more important than “facts” or “truth”.

Unless such public-service announcements “make transparent the ‘values and beliefs that underlie them,’” they should quit describing breastfeeding as “natural.”

“You should do this thing because WE say so. If you don’t do as we say, we will call you names like ‘sexist’ or ‘transphobic’, or whatever other word we think of, until we get our way. Then when you prove your weakness and cowardice by giving in to our initial demands, we’ll start making even more outrageous demands, and force you to do as we say again.”

But the study’s authors, Jessica Martucci and Anne Barnhill, clearly have in mind an alternative set of “values and beliefs,” about which which they are not transparent.

anne-barnhill-jessica-martucci.jpg
The fact that these two fools each have a PhD, is a testament to how much the Academic system in the West has declined.

According to this article, they actually first published this lunacy over a year ago. When called out on it, they just screeched about “misogyny”, claiming people were just attacking them for being outspoken women, rather than the fact that their ideas were being ridiculed for their obvious stupidity.

It’s unclear whether they’re worried about how traditional female gender roles may limit women’s progress in the workforce, or whether this is part of the discussion about whether conventional views about motherhood exclude transgender people.

Who cares what their motivation was? Either way, it doesn’t change the fact that breastfeeding IS natural. There’s no justification for what they are claiming.

Or perhaps this is just another example of how the progressive obsession with gender and sexuality has permeated all fields of academic study.

Yeah that’s probably the most likely explanation.

how_it_works.png
This is what they actually believe happens in real life.

Regardless, Martucci and Barnhill mask their agenda by also making the unconvincing secondary argument that describing breastfeeding as “natural” fuels the anti-vaccine movement.

When public-service announcements praise breastfeeding as “natural,” Martucci and Barnhill argue, the implication is that manufactured or mass-produced products are questionable or dangerous—so these promotions may unintentionally encourage parents to reject scientific progress elsewhere.

*Claims breastfeeding shouldn’t be described as “natural”*

*Accuses others of rejecting scientific progress*

You know what, that’s good enough to become a “College liberal” meme. So I’m going to go to the generator, and make one right now.

download.jpeg
Perfect.

“If doing what is ‘natural’ is ‘best’ in the case of breastfeeding, how can we expect mothers to ignore that powerful and deeply persuasive worldview when making choices about vaccination?” they write.

Because they are two different things and have absolutely no connection, you idiot. Doing one, doesn’t have any bearing on whether or not they’ll do the other.

There’s certainly an assertive worldview woven throughout this paper, though we find it neither powerful nor deeply persuasive.

Yeah, I doubt most sane people would.

 

School becomes a Communist indoctrination centre.

Liberal-Jew-Communists.png
Why even wait until university anymore? Now you can get started with your Communist indoctrination at school.

I’ve jokingly referred to Western universities as “Marxist re-education centres” in the past. Anyone who has seen what goes on there should understand why. However, it seems that some Marxist ideologues, aren’t willing to wait until their targets are in university, before commencing with the brainwashing. They’d rather get to the kids while they’re still in school.

From Daily Caller

The New York City Department of Education is investigating a taxpayer-funded secondary school principal in Brooklyn for allegedly promoting communism and recruiting students for radical political causes.

If there’s one thing the world needs more of, it’s attempts to implement Communism. Sure, it has been an abject failure, resulting in millions of deaths, every single time it has been attempted before, but eventually, it’s sure to work out well. We just have to keep on trying, and eventually we’ll get it right.

efe.jpg
It will be different when I try it. Trust me.

The principal, Jill Bloomberg of Park Slope Collegiate, has responded by filing a federal lawsuit seeking to stop the investigation, reports New York public radio station WNYC.

BLOOMBERG!!!!

BLOOMBERG!!!!

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!

The New York City education department initiated its investigation into Bloomberg’s alleged communist and communist-recruitment activities based on a tip from someone who remains anonymous.

Probably afraid of suffering retaliation for speaking out. And really, who can blame them with how unhinged those Antifa, Communist scum have become as of late?

Antifa-Cronulla-740x493.jpg
Keep in mind that by their definition, a “Fascist” is anyone who isn’t a full blown Communist.

The tipster told officials that Bloomberg is affiliated with the Progressive Labor Party, a revolutionary communist political party based in Brooklyn.

LA-md-2016.jpg
These cretins have now infiltrated the school system, in order to propagate their failed and completely idiotic bollocksology.

Court documents filed by the education department say that the investigation is focused on allegations that Bloomberg has worked to promote the agenda of the Progressive Labor Party by recruiting students “to participate in organizational activities, including marches for her political organization.”

He-alone-who-owns-the-youth-gains-the-future.-Adolf-Hitler.jpg
A future where the youth are brainwashed into believing in Communism. What could possibly go wrong?

According to the Progressive Labor Party’s website, the group seeks to foment violent revolution. “Only the dictatorship of the working class — communism — can provide a lasting solution to the disaster that is today’s world for billions of people. This cannot be done through electoral politics, but requires a revolutionary movement and a mass Red Army led by PLP.”

It’s amazing that this sort of thing has been tried countless times already over the past century, and every single time that it has, it has always made things even worse for the “working class” that it’s supposed to help. Mass arrests and incarceration. Food shortages. Slave labour. Torture and executions. It’s always the same. I actually wonder at times, how many of these people who push for this are just evil, totalitarian brutes, who know this and simply don’t care, and how many are just naive idiots who have no knowledge of what has already happened..

Also: “Communism means the Party leads every aspect of society. For this to work, millions of workers — eventually everyone — must become communist organizers. Join Us!”

That’s because it has to control everything, because it’s completely at odds with human nature. If the party didn’t control everything, nobody would go along with it, because it is such a stupid system that no sane person would willingly participate in.

5934556+_ce96bcbfe6765ed0c03e9aa0c62adabc.jpg
I wonder why we don’t ever see as many Fascist Ideologues in the modern world as Communist ones? 

The Progressive Labor Party “fights to destroy capitalism and the dictatorship of the capitalist class” by organizing “workers, soldiers and youth into a revolutionary movement for communism.”

“Destroy a dictatorship”

“Implement a different dictatorship”

Court documents filed by New York City’s education department allege that students who disagree with Bloomberg and her comrades “are not allowed to express” their political views.

Of course not, because in a fair and honest debate, they wouldn’t be able to justify their belief system at all. There’s no logic or sanity to it, and if people were allowed to have an open discussion about it, it would be torn apart with ease, hence why they have to silence opinions that are critical of them. It’s the same reason why the Antifa scum use violence and intimidation against people they consider “fascists”. It’s because the “fascists” have logic and reason on their side and would easily win a debate, so the Antifa use violence, rather than logic to support their belief system.

In addition, the school district says, Bloomberg and her husband used footage of Park Slope Collegiate students and staff in documentary for a Progressive Labor Party-affiliated group “without authorization” from the students or staff members.

The policies of New York City’s school district “prohibit the use of school facilities, equipment and supplies on behalf of political organizations,” according to the education department’s court filing.

It’s ok though, she’s one of God’s chosen people. The “system” will probably take that into consideration.

jews_image19.jpg

Bloomberg’s lawsuit concerning the investigation — filed Friday — contends that the investigation into her alleged communist activities is retaliation because she opposes racism and has criticized the New York City Board of Education for, she says, practices that amount to segregation.

No, it’s probably because you’re trying to brainwash impressionable children into supporting a totalitarian and failed ideology that has resulted in millions of deaths.

Earlier this year, Bloomberg charged the education department with discrimination because, she said, a school with many white students received more sports equipment than Park Slope Collegiate did. The students at Park Slope Collegiate are primarily black and Latino.

I’m guessing the white students probably have parents who pay more in taxes, so their kids should benefit more.

Supporters of Bloomberg packed a Lower Manhattan courtroom for a hearing related to Bloomberg’s lawsuit. Many of them all wore the same t-shirts.

Like the brainwashed cult that they are…

HOK3OTEs.jpeg
In an actual Communist society, these people would probably be among the first lined up against a wall and shot for “outliving their usefullness”.

After the hearing, Bloomberg and her supporters spoke.

“What speech is prohibited?” Bloomberg asked, according to Chalkbeat, an education news outlet.

Probably speech that she personally disapproves of.

“The speech I am most known for is anti-racism,” the principal also said.

Bloomberg’s supporters recited her message in remarkably similar fashion.

A Park Slope Collegiate eighth grader named Maya showed up at the court proceedings to declare that Bloomberg only wants to fight against racism.

And to fight to implement Communism.

“It’s just upsetting that she’s being accused of stating her own political views when she’s just stating the facts that racism is here,” Maya informed Chalkbeat.

Funny how she’s allowed to state her political views, but the students who disagree with her aren’t.

A special education teacher, Sarah Vega, swore that Bloomberg never tries to indoctrinate students with revolutionary communist propaganda.

“I’ve worked for her for over a decade,” Vega told Chalkbeat. “I’ve never seen her furthering any political agenda whatsoever. She fights against racism, but I don’t really consider that partisan politics.”

Bloomberg has indicated that she does not belong to the Progressive Labor Party.

Somehow, I don’t believe any of this

This week, a federal judge is expected to decide whether to allow the investigation by school officials to proceed.

My guess, the judge will probably have a last name ending with either “berg”, “stein”, “witz” or “cohen”, and will throw it out. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong though.

Huffington Post writer ~ “Lets ban white men from voting”.

An anti-white male article?

On the Huffington Post?

Wow, who would have ever seen that coming?

From Huffington Post

Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa’s biggest cities.

How dare these white men vote in favour of their demographic interests? That’s racist and sexist. But if women or racial minorities vote as a bloc for their demographic interests, that’s “progressive”.

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world.

Just long enough to make sure the damage is done, and that they’ll be powerless to reverse it by then anyway.

events-haitian-revolution-1791-1804-black-slaves-attack-whites-wood-CP404M.jpg
And then once they’re powerless and disenfranchised, this will start happening… AGAIN.

The influence of reckless white males were one of the primary reasons that led to the Great Recession which began in 2008.

Yeah, “white males” did that.

Jewish-Bankers.jpg

Or how about that non-pictured above “white male”, Richard Fuld, who was the chairman of Lehman Brothers, before it collapsed, and dragged the world down with it.

This would also strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed. 

I think that ship has already sailed…

skirts-rape-march-men.jpg

BILD.JPG

da28cd20fec1e007beafa695f4c12ee6a9fbb9e3760972c93f200322d05dc1b8.jpg

red-high-heels-rose-barracks-vilseck-germany.jpg

post-11155-044029400 1334577519_thumb.jpg

db00db762fe81e89ae43d8aa0331dddc_pajama-boy-memes-memesuper-pyjama-boy-meme_500-375.jpeg

Yeah, not really seeing much “toxic masculinity” from white men these days.

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners. After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism.

Yeah, those “white men” again, are the ones responsible for that.

ClintonDonors90.jpg

billionaires.jpg

rothy.jpg

Untitled-1.png
Source

A period of twenty years without white men in the world’s parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.

Yes, because the redistribution of wealth has never led to violence, when it has been tried in the past.

36d6ee74490bf20e9b54b75a372a6908.jpg
The real violence is all that wealth that “white males” own.
 This redistribution of the world’s wealth is long overdue, and it is not just South Africa where white males own a disproportionate amount of wealth. While in South Africa 90 percent of the country’s land is in the hands of whites (it is safe to assume these are mainly men), along with 97 percent of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, this is also the norm in the rest of the world.
I’ve dealt with South Africa already.

No need to repeat myself.

Namibia has similar statistics with regard to land distribution and one can assume this holds for other assets too. As Oxfam notes eight men control as much as wealth as the poorest 50 percent of the world’s population. In the United States ten percent of the population (nearly all white) own 90 percent of all assets

It’s always funny how Jews are “white” when they do something bad, or are disproportionately over-represented in something good, but they quickly revert to their Jewish identity, whenever they want to claim victimhood.  If I didn’t know better, I’d suspect that they were looking to pawn off the blame for their wrongdoings on another group.

– it is likely that these assets are largely in the hands of males. Although statistics by race are difficult to find from other parts of the world, it is very likely that the majority of the world’s assets are in the hands of white males, despite them making up less than 10 percent of the world’s population.

Might have something to do with the fact that most of the really successful countries in the world, such as those of Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand, were built by white males, and white people are still the majority demographic in these countries. But don’t worry, if Zimbabwe, Haiti, and South Africa are any indication of things to come, these countries won’t be so successful for much longer.

It is obvious that this violent status quo will not change without a struggle, and the only way to do so will be through the expropriation of these various assets and equitably distribute them to those who need them.

The mindset of people like this is astounding. How exactly is this status quo “violent”? Who exactly is experiencing “violence”? This is what they always do. It’s the same tactic utilised by those Antifa scum, whenever they brutally attack people for having political opinions they disagree with. They classify non-violent acts, words, or in this case, situations, as being violent, in order to justify their own acts of actual violence (when they eventually happen), as being “self defence” against the “violence” that they claim they are experiencing from their target. It’s insane, but that’s just how these Communist thugs operate. It’s all about conditioning people over time to perceive things a certain way, by using certain language and repeating it over and over until it sinks in.

montreal4march.jpg
The Antifa guys, kicking the guy on the ground, aren’t the violent ones. They’re just engaging in self defence against the violent political opinions of this man.
South-Africa.jpg
The black South Africans aren’t the violent ones, when they brutally murder white South Africans. They’re just engaging in self defence against the violence of the white South Africans, by having more success than them.
This will not only make the world a more equitable place, but will also go some way to paying the debt that white males owe the world. Over the past 500 years colonialism, slavery, and various aggressive wars and genocides, have been due to the actions of white men. Redistributing some of their assets will go some way to paying the historical debt that they owe society.

Besides the fact that it’s completely unjustifiable to hold people collectively responsible for the sins committed by people in the past (why should I for example, be held responsible for Colonialism, when I wasn’t even born when it happened?), it also ignores the fact that all these sins, colonialism, slavery, aggressive wars, and genocides, have been practiced by all races. In the case of colonialism, to name a few examples, we have the Empire of Japan, the Inca Empire, the Aztec Empire, The Ottoman Empire, and The Mongol Empire (the last two of which even colonised white lands).

64886-004-2353B724
Oh look at that, The Turkish Ottoman Empire colonised white lands in Europe.
Mongol_Empire-largest.png
Same with the Asian Mongol Empire. Where’s my reparations from Turks and Mongolians?

Wars and slavery have been practiced by every culture that has ever existed, but only white people willingly put an end to slavery (even having to use their power in the world to force its abolition on other races that practiced it). In the case of genocides, we have examples such as the Jewish bolshevik led Holodomor (the victims of which, were white), the Turkish led Armenian and Greek Genocides (again the victims being white), and the black led Rwandan Genocide, just to name a few examples. It’s ridiculous to hold all white people collectively responsible for historical crimes committed by other white people, but not holding members of other races to the same standards. But of course, this isn’t about justice. It’s just purely racial hatred towards white people.

It is no surprise that liberalism – and its ideological offshoots of conservatism and libertarianism – are the most popular ideologies among white males. These ideologies with their focus on individuals and individual responsibility, rather than group affiliation, allow white men to ignore the debt that they owe society, and from acknowledging that most of their assets, wealth, and privilege are the result of theft and violence.

Most of our assets and wealth came from theft and violence?

“Citation needed”

Interesting how she complains about white men having political ideologies that focus on individuality, rather than on collectivism. I can guarantee, that if we did develop demographic awareness, and started playing the identity politics game, just like every other racial group does, she’d complain about that as well, for being “racist”. Essentially, we’re damned no matter what we do, because she isn’t a rational person, looking to have a rational discussion, to potentially resolve any perceived injustices (that can even be proven to exist). She’s just a hate filled bitch, who despises everything about us, and nothing less than handing over everything we own to people who aren’t “white males”, and getting down on our knees before them, will ever satisfy her. Even then, it probably still wouldn’t be enough, because we’d still be breathing.

Some may argue that this is unfair. Let’s be clear, it may be unfair, but a moratorium on the franchise for white males for a period of between 20 and 30 years is a small price to pay for the pain inflicted by white males on others, particularly those with black, female-identifying bodies.

The pain that “white males” inflict on “black, female-identifying bodies”.

tumblr_n2i5w0KYgO1qaeo2oo1_500.png
What about the pain that “black males” inflict on “white, female-identifying bodies”?
In addition, white men should not be stripped of their other rights, and this withholding of the franchise should only be a temporary measure, as the world rights the wrongs of the past.

Yeah, sure.

“Temporary measure”

A withholding of the franchise from white males, along with the passing of legislation in this period to redistribute some of their assets, will also, to a degree, act as the reparations for slavery, colonialism, and apartheid, which the world is crying out for to be paid.

The more I read on, and see how ridiculous it is, the more I start to think it’s a satirical article, just to annoy people like me. Then again, the Huffington Post really has been terrible in the past, so it probably is real. At the very best, the article might have been submitted by a troll, and isn’t intended seriously, but the Huffington Post still published it, so at the very least, they approve of its message, serious or not.

As we saw after the recent altercation between a white man and Lebohang Mabuya at a Spur restaurant in Johannesburg, white males still believe that they are in control, and people who aren’t white or male (in particularly black female-identifying people) have to bow to their every whim.

Interesting, lets watch the video of that incident.

Notice how at the very start of the video, the man makes a comment about how his child was hit in the head by one of her children? In fact, this article that has eye-witness accounts from before the recording began, backs up this accusation. He wasn’t being aggressive with the woman because he’s a white man, and she’s a black woman. He was being aggressive, because one of her brats hit his daughter, and she wouldn’t discipline the child. What parent wouldn’t be pissed off in a situation like that? According to this Huffington Post writer, he has no right to stand up for his child, just because he’s a white man, dealing with a black woman.

There are numerous other examples of white angry male violence in South Africa and abroad, often against black bodies (Dylann Roof’s terrorist actions in the United States is only one of many examples).

Dylann Roof is a reasonable case to criticise. Going into a church full of black parishioners and gunning them down, just because of their race, is not acceptable. Of course, it’s still a drop in the ocean compared to the black on white violence, that this woman wouldn’t dream of condemning.

crime_statistics_01.jpg

It is time to wrestle control of the world back from white males, and the first step will be a temporary restriction of the franchise to them.

Although this may seem unfair and unjust, allowing white males to continue to call the shots politically and economically, following their actions over the past 500 years, is the greater injustice.

Just repetition of (dumb) points already made earlier in the article. Exactly the kind of writing skill I would expect from a Huffington Post “Journalist”.

LA school to get less funding, for having too many white students.

quote-the-worst-form-of-inequality-is-to-try-to-make-unequal-things-equal-aristotle-6833.jpg

I remember a few months ago, shortly after Trump’s election victory, a girl on my Facebook “Friends” list, posted some pathetic self-flagellating article about white privilege. The gist of the article she posted, was this. The writer (a black woman) was lecturing white liberals who were upset that Trump won, that they had no right to talk about how upset they were, because they all had white privilege, and so only minorities had the right to talk about how upset they felt. My “friend” (a white liberal herself), didn’t dispute this. Instead, she agreed with it and posted it to virtue signal and to pontificate to the rest of us, probably with the expectation of a bunch of comments praising her for being so enlightened, and plenty of “likes”.

Instead of this happening, myself and one other guy questioned why she was posting such a condescending article and asked her why she thought it was alright for this person to generalise and attack people (people who ideologically agree with her no less), on the basis of their skin colour? We also questioned the validity of the existence of white privilege, and asked her to explain how it exists. Rather than respond to our questions in her own words, she just posted some really long articles that talked about white privilege, and tried to let the articles do the talking for her, rather than talking herself, and using the article as a source to confirm her own points. Very quickly, she stopped responding, both to me, and to the other guy who was questioning her. About a week or so later, she quietly unfriended me, possibly because I had offended her by daring to question her. I don’t think I was particularly offensive or aggressive btw. In fact, I can post the whole debate we had, right here, minus the links to the articles she posted (which I never bothered to save).

So here was my first comment:

“But what about the Hispanics, Black people, and members of other minority groups that chose to vote for Trump? How can it be assumed that it was racism that won out, in that regard? If anything, I think it’s attitudes like that of this author that helped cause the Trump victory. Instead of having civil and open dialogues with Trump supporters (of all demographics), trying to understand why they supported him, and listening to their concerns, there’s been nothing but insults, bullying, and shaming tactics against them and all this did was push them further towards him. Even now, instead of looking at the victory and trying to really understand why he won, there is still nothing but insults and tarring every person who voted for him with the same brush. Yes, I’m well aware of the KKK and Neo-Nazi support he received, but acting as if all his support was from people like that, isn’t constructive at all.”

She then replied:

“The value in the article is about evaluating privilege and bringing awareness to systemic racism in America. However you can clearly see in the election statistics that Trump won due to voter turnout in rural counties with overwhelmingly white populations.”

white-privelege.jpg

Along with the above comment, she posted a bunch of links to articles talking about how white privilege is totally a real thing, and not just some racist conspiracy theory designed to demonise white people as a whole.

So I replied:

“Of course, I’m well aware that the majority of Trump’s voters were white, but the point I’m making by bringing up the non-white Trump voters is that they do in fact exist. The media keeps focusing on the “whitelash” as I’ve heard it referred to, while ignoring the minorities who supported him at a roughly similar percentage as they supported Romney in 2012. I think instead of automatically jumping to conclusions about racism, it might make more sense to actually engage with the voters (including these minorities who clearly didn’t have a problem with any of his “racist” remarks) and listen to their reasons for voting for him. For example, beyond the minorities who voted for Trump, many white people who had voted for Obama in previous elections, voted for Trump in this one. While I know that there obviously are many genuine racists who voted for him, it would be unfair to assume that racism was the primary motivator when taking those minorities and former Obama supporters into account.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/trump-won-a-lot-of-white-working-class-obama-voters.html

As for the “privilege” argument, I don’t buy into that stuff for a second. All “privilege” is, is an excuse to disregard the viewpoints and opinions of, and tear down members of certain demographics, just because of the group they were born into. Privilege theory is just a redirection of Marx’s theories from economics (ie, the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’) to identity politics (the oppressed and oppressors), further causing division and resentment between groups. If white people are such a privileged group for example, then why is it that they’re the only group that aren’t allowed to vote as a bloc for their group interests without being considered racist for doing so, when it’s perfectly acceptable for a politician to go after “the black or Hispanic vote”? Why is it that other groups can make insulting, derogatory and sweeping generalisations about white people as a whole (like this author is doing with her white liberal allies), when if a white person did the same thing about any other group, they would be crucified?

And as for “systematic racism”, this is a legit question, because obviously you would have a much better insight into the American situation than I would, but how exactly is there still systematic racism? Where does it come from, and how does it work? I don’t understand how in a country where the majority of white people are terrified of the social stigma of being considered a racist, and where in the past 50 years at least, there has been a lot of time, effort, and money spent on racial integration, affirmative action, “no child left behind” in schools etc, how it exists, who is behind it, and examples of it in action.

I’m not trying to be a smartass or anything as I genuinely am interested in learning things that I may been ignorant of, because I do acknowledge that I’m only a distant observer, and you’re right there living it, but at the same time, I’ve read so many articles from, and seen so many videos on youtube from people who seem more interested in hating, blaming, and shaming white people as a whole, rather than just opposing racism, that I’m always very skeptical when I read articles like this one.”

I don’t think anything I said was particularly unreasonable here. I even acknowledged the fact that she, being an American, would obviously know more about the American situation than I would, and I legitimately asked her for evidence of systematic racism in action in her country.

Her response:

“[Name redacted], I think there is too much for me to cover regarding your post. There are smarter people than me who better articulate why privilege is very real and what is happening in this country right now and the historical context so I will point you to some reading. Posted below.”

And again, she posted a few long winded articles, rather than actually making the arguments in her own words. Just for the record, I have no issue with posting links in a debate, but I think they should be posted as support material for an argument being put forward, not as the argument itself.

I then replied with this:

“I don’t buy into the reality of white privilege for a second [Name redacted]. What they refer to as “privilege” is simply an excuse to attack and belittle white people as a whole simply for being born white in a predominately white country. It would be like saying “Asian privilege” to a Chinese person in China, “Black Privilege” to a black person in Nigeria, Arab privilege to an Arab person in Saudi Arabia etc. It’s just an anti-white slur, based on Frankfurt school theories from the 1960s. Do the white people who are suffering severe racial discrimination in Zimbabwe and South Africa right now also benefit from white privilege?

For that matter, if white privilege and structural racism really does exist in America then why is that it’s Asians and Jews (many of the latter don’t consider themselves white and instead consider Jewishness a racial category) who are the most highly educated and wealthy demographics on average, moreso than white people? In theory, in a white privileged, structural racism based society, wouldn’t those groups be held back as well?

I think the problem is the use of what I’ve heard referred to as the “apex fallacy”. People see that most of the most powerful people in a country are white (which just makes sense based on the fact that most people in general are white in the West so demographics alone would cause this) and therefore assume that all white people have the same benefits as that small group of powerful people. It would be like me citing people like Obama, Loretta Lynch, Jesse Jackson, and various top black figures in entertainment and sport, and claiming that their success was representative of the experience of all black people, something which would obviously be quite rightfully dismissed as inaccurate.

As for the list on white privilege, it’s about as offensive and unfair as this meme.

http://41.media.tumblr.com/74a6c468e85f790f44403d0114f1e629/tumblr_n0hjq6l5Ge1ts7lqzo1_1280.png

I’m just getting tired of the moaning and accusations against white people as a whole, as if we all need to feel bad for being born white in a mostly white country. If there are real problems then by all means, they should be explained so that they can be worked on. But attacking us as a whole solves nothing, and only causes would be allies to lose sympathy after a while.”

WhitePrivilegeMyth_zpst90w2j4i

And she never responded to this, and I heard nothing from her again until the notification a week or so later, telling me that she had unfriended me.

Anyway, I kind of went off on a tangent there. I was just reminded of this little debate we had, when I read this article below. I wonder if my former “friend” would still believe that it’s white people who are the privileged ones in America, after reading this.

From ABC 7

Outrage has grown at Walter Reed Middle School in North Hollywood, as the school faces layoffs and increased class sizes due to a law limiting funds for schools with a higher white student body.

If a school has too many white kids, it gets less funding from the taxpayer (most of whom are white, btw).

The Los Angeles Unified School District provides more funding for schools where the white population is below 30 percent.

But if a school has a very low white population, it gets more funding. Yet, we’re supposed to believe that white people are the privileged ones. In a country that is predominately white, was built by white people, and has mostly white taxpayers, it’s the racial minorities who get more financial support. How does this make sense?

In a letter to parents, the district noted the highly regarded middle school had been above the percentage for the past couple years.

The racial formula was a condition imposed by court decisions dealing with desegregation in the 1970s.

And yet when it suits them, they’ll always claim that race doesn’t matter, and that we’re all exactly the same, apart from the colour of our skin.

Parents, however, remain frustrated with what the cuts might mean for their children.

And really, why shouldn’t they be? Their children’s education will potentially suffer, just because of the colour of their skin. Meanwhile, the taxes they’re paying, will be redistributed to schools with a higher proportion of black and hispanic students instead. This is not fair, plain and simple.

“When your class sizes are getting larger and you’re taking resources away from students, I mean ss parents, you do want your kid to go out to college,” one parent, Rosemary Estrada, said.

In an attempt to lessen the budget cuts, the district changed the school’s spending formula to one based on the number of students.

“Thankfully we’re going to keep our librarian. We’re going to keep our nurse, but we may lose a few teachers, but not as many as we once thought,” said Sheila Edmiston, one student’s parent.

Several jobs will still be lost and class sizes could grow. For many parents, the race-based reason of “too many white students” has made the cuts more difficult to swallow.

Meanwhile, if you want to understand why schools with a higher proportion of black and hispanic students, typically fare much worse than those with a higher proportion of white students, here’s a good possibility as to why.

It has nothing to do with white privilege or systematic racism. It’s entirely because of problems within the minority communities themselves. The reason we aren’t seeing an equal outcome, isn’t because they aren’t being treated equally. It’s because they aren’t behaving equally. I’m not saying every single individual student of a minority background, behaves like those in the videos above, nor am I suggesting that every single white student is a perfect angel, who would never behave like this. However, for the most part, this sort of behaviour seems to occur mainly within the black and hispanic student populations.

When I read this article, it reminded me a lot of the situation that I discussed recently, regarding a literacy test for prospective teachers being scrapped, because too many blacks and hispanics couldn’t pass it. There is this insane obsession with achieving equality. The problem is, as the Aristotle quote at the beginning of this article says, you can’t make unequal things equal, at least not at the higher level. For example, lets say I have four apples, and you have two, and there are no other apples around. We can’t make it so that each of us can have an equal number of apples, and at the same time, allow me to keep my four. All we can do is take an apple from me, and give it to you, and make us equal that way. Therefore, rather than simply raising the person with less up, they drag the person with more down.

When the Soviet Union first came into existence, there had been a lot of poor peasants, and a few rich aristocrats. They couldn’t bring the peasants up to the level of wealth of the aristocrats, so what they did, was take away the wealth of the aristocrats, so everybody was equally poor. It’s the same kind of logic happening in the American education system now. They’ve tried for decades now to achieve equality in racial education standards, and they’ve gotten nowhere. With equal funding, they can’t seem to bring the black and hispanic students, up to the level of the white (and Asian) students, so their plan instead is to cripple the white students’ education, and drag them down to the level of the black and hispanic students. Then, when every racial group is equally uneducated, they’ll finally achieve “equality” and all live happily ever after.

i4gshdQ

Black Pigeon Speaks on the South African situation.

So yeah, a couple of days ago, I wrote a post in response to the current ongoing situation in South Africa. In that post, I made the prediction that if things keep going the way they’re going, that we would see a massive racial conflict there, and that South Africa would inevitably become a second Zimbabwe. Here we are two days later, and Black Pigeon Speaks has done a video on the topic. He goes into more detail than I did, but he ultimately comes to the same conclusions that I did.

Check it out.

I think this is a pretty important topic to pay attention to, because this is a preview of what will inevitably happen in all predominately white countries in the future. Based on what has happened in Haiti, Zimbabwe, and is currently happening in South Africa, here’s what will happen in Europe and North America before long:

  • White people build successful country from nothing.
  • Non-white people move to successful white country from their own unsuccessful country.
  • Non-white people become jealous of success that white people have in country built by their own ancestors.
  • Affirmative action is put in place to help non-white people achieve parity with whites.
  • Taxes are redistributed from tax payers (mainly white people) to do this.
  • White birth rate declines from financial strain, and non-white birth rates increases, along with non-white immigration.
  • Eventually, non-whites outnumber whites in formerly white majority countries.
  • Non-whites take over from the “privileged whites”.
  • Non-whites start persecuting white people (who they’ve been conditioned to think of as racist oppressors).
  • White people have their jobs, land, and wealth stolen from them.
  • Massacres against white people begin.
  • Economy collapses and infrastructure starts to decline due to incompetence.
  • Country becomes an economic shithole.

We’ve seen this happen in Haiti. We’ve seen it happen in Zimbabwe. We’re seeing it unfold in real time in South Africa. And we will see it in Europe and North America eventually, if things don’t change.