The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Peter Lee ArchiveBlogview
Is America Ready for a War on White Privilege?
shutterstock_513636580
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

In my opinion, all political campaigns are identity based. Shaking the money tree to the tune of $1 billion + it now takes to run a national campaign demands access to big money, deference to capital, and a willingness to promote political loyalties on the basis of identity, not class. George Soros is not going to underwrite an anti-plutocrat jacquerie marching on Washington.

Post-election there has been a lot of defensive bleating by mainstream Dems that they did not run an identity politics campaign i.e. one that trafficked primarily in ethnic/gender allegiances to attract voters.

There is considerable spittle devoting to rebutting the idea that Clintonism was Vote Your Vag + African American tactical voting. “Issues, ability, and values brought the voters to Clinton” is the refrain.

The campaign spin was that Clinton, a tired pol with more baggage than an Indian passenger train– and who had interrupted her self-declared mission as champion of the oppressed for a resume-polishing stint as warmonger at the State Department–was Jesus in a pantsuit and the primary task of her campaign would be restraining the American public from skipping the election and making her president by acclamation.

Judging by the immortal exchange at Harvard between Kellyanne Conway and Jennifer Palmieri (“’I would rather lose than win the way you guys did,’ Palmieri said, her voice shaking” per NPR. Well, Wish. Granted.) it looks like the Clinton campaign had partaken intemperately of its own Kool-Aid.

Trouble is, Clinton was an establishment pol promoting a rather murky elitist and globalist agenda that pushed zero nationalist and populist buttons. She was the candidate of the 1% and she needed help of some of the 99% to push her across the electoral finish line. She and her handlers chose identity, not soak-the-rich faux populism as her path to the White House.

Clinton’s strategists eventually chose identity-lite for the general election campaign, targeting voters whose idea of heaven is attending continuous performances of Hamilton for the rest of eternity, instead of unambiguously throwing out red meat to the blocs she was targeting to elect her.

Coulda worked. Shoulda worked. Except Clinton was a clumsy campaigner with a less than galvanizing message. Trump, a talented carny barker, ran his much narrower identity politics campaign as an outsider, igniting the bonfire of white anxiety and stoking it to white heat. And, pending the outcome of the recounts, he did good enough to win.

Unsurprisingly, the Democratic Hamiltonians hang their hats on the coulda/should/mighta/might still.

This comes up a lot, complete with torrents of spicy rhetorical lava, when Sandernistas play the class card and claim their guy wudda won with a class-based appeal that would have lured a decisive number of white males into the Democratic camp.

Prudence might dictate looking at Sanders’ socialism-lite as a way to advantageously slice and dice the white electoral gristle.

Inside the Democratic Party at this moment, however, vitriol carries the day as champions of the “woke” coalition—energized by African-Americans who, with the endorsement of John Lewis, placed all their eggs in the Clinton basket—point the finger of blame at everybody and anyone but themselves for failing to deliver the “Expect Us” rainbow triumph, and furiously resist Sandernista white “class” outreach.

Problematically, repudiation of the Sandernista claim involves tarring both Sanders and the voters he was targeting as irredeemable, despicable racists who would have been deaf to any principled class-based appeal.

This kind of flamethrowing works OK if you won the election; but if you’ve lost, and find it necessary to dismiss almost half of the electorate as either Nazis or deluded fellow travelers—and sustain eye-bulging outrage for the duration of Trump’s administration– it creates a certain awkwardness.

It’s also identity politics. You can call it “identity politics by default: they started it!” but it’s basically “Admirables” vs. “Deplorables”. Unity is derided as appeasement and the political dynamics are being driven toward increased polarization by a combination of money, self-interest, hurt pride, conviction, and calculation. Judging by my Twitter timeline, not an infallible indicator I’ll admit, defining and running against the Trump Republican Party as bigoted scum is seen by some activists as a winning strategy as well as a moral imperative.

Sooner or later, the Democratic Party is going to have to decide whether an overt anti-white-male-racist posture is going to deliver the winning combination of advantageous demographics, fired-up base, and big-money support. 2018 (mid-terms) or 2020 (presidential)? Or maybe sometime later?

In other words…

When will the War on White Privilege be fought?

Well, it was already roadtested during the primaries. Hillary Clinton’s surrogates used it to eviscerate Bernie Sanders in the southern states, and POC activists still use it to deny Sandernistas a spot at the DNC strategy table/feeding trough.

White privilege issues took a dirt nap during the general, when avoiding the alienation of white voters nationwide took precedence over nailing down black Democratic support during the crucial southern primaries.

But I saw inklings of it back in June, when John Lewis organized a sit-in of Democrats on the floor of the House of Representatives to protest Republican inaction on gun control following the Pulse nightclub massacre.

Lewis was attempting to amplify the call President Barack Obama made for gun control legislation in his eulogy for Reverend Clement Pinckney, one of eight people, all African-Americans, massacred in a church in Charleston. Obama framed the Charleston killings as a tragedy but also a catharsis, one that would bridge racial divides and unite Americans in a shared abhorrence of gun violence.

None of us can or should expect a transformation in race relations overnight. Every time something like this happens, somebody says we have to have a conversation about race. We talk a lot about race. There’s no shortcut. And we don’t need more talk. (Applause.) None of us should believe that a handful of gun safety measures will prevent every tragedy. It will not.

But it would be a betrayal of everything Reverend Pinckney stood for, I believe, if we allowed ourselves to slip into a comfortable silence again.

The political conditions were deemed to be ripe, since demographic and electoral shifts had forced the NRA in a deep, virtually monogamous relationship with the Republican Party and allowed the Democrats to seize the moral and political high ground as both national unifiers and gun control advocates.

The opportunity to amplify African American social and political aspirations through the broader issue of gun control was, I expect, seen as attractive both by African American and Democratic political strategists.

At Slate, Jamelle Bouie laid out the thinking:

[N]either [Pelosi] nor her caucus has to cater to vulnerable Democrats in the rural South or West. The kinds of voters Democrats once tried to attract by shying away from gun politics are Republicans now. And Democrats don’t believe they need to reach out to them. The politics, they argue, have turned… this past week is the clearest possible evidence that we’re watching a new kind of Democratic Party, one in which a young black representative from Brooklyn named Hakeem Jeffries, speaking shortly before midnight, invokes Martin Luther King and Bull Connor in a call-and-response with his colleagues. One that’s changing.

The GOP, at least in the eyes of liberal critics, had in contrast committed itself irrevocably to serving as the party of the white as the Democrats scooped up the rest of the rainbow.

This understanding—that the Democrats were already on the winning side in the identity politics contest—perhaps provided the pretext for officially dismissing the overt influence of identity politics considerations and focus on ladling out Clinton pap in the general election instead.

Beyond the predictable exploitation of the Republicans’ slavish devotion to the agenda of the NRA, there was an interesting kulturkampf subtext: that the dead hand of white conservative America was holding back the real America by its domination of institutions like the US Congress, which is pretty much lily-white.

In fact, a rather compelling case was made that, thanks to the vital alliance between the NRA and conservative Republicans, collateral damage of the effort to maintain GOP dominance was the unnecessary deaths of thousands of Americans due to gun violence.

Or as Bill Moyers put it:

Once again the Republican leaders of Congress have been revealed for what they are: useful stooges of the gun merchants who would sell to anyone — from the mentally ill to a terrorist-in-waiting to a lurking mass murderer. And the Republican Party once again has shown itself an enabler of death, the enemy of life, a threat to the republic itself.

Human decency as well as American progress, therefore, would dictate that these old white guys and their reactionary and self-serving agenda get booted from office and letting a new team dedicated to pushing America forward instead of holding it back take over.

It was a seductive narrative of what I like to call “White Twilight/Black Dawn!” It exploited the rhetoric of intersectionality—shared experience of oppression as a defining political identity—to permit the African American community, as the prime wronged American ethnic bloc, to claim a position of moral and political leadership.

Of course, white privilege is sustained not only by racist domination of powerful institutions, but also by white votes, and direct confrontations with white political power, particularly on behalf of African Americans who compose only 14% of the US electorate, tend not to go well, particularly in national elections.

African American activists’ ambitions to punch above their weight are increasingly hampered by their limited demographic clout and also by perceptions that their political strength has plateaued and the growing Hispanic demographic component will displace African Americans in the party league tables and hearts of political planners. Hence the obsession with the “intersectional” force-multiplier narrative.

Add to that disturbing expressions of black militancy surrounding the shootings of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, and I think a conscious decision was made by Clinton strategists in the summer of 2016 to soft-pedal racially-inflected attacks on white privilege (like Occupy stunts in Congress led by black male politicians!) and go with the positive but apparently fatally mushy “rainbow coalition” alignment (hugging black moms + Hamilton!).

The electoral results were not pretty. Now the question is, rethink or double-down on race-inflected Democratic identity politics?

Is there a political future in an open, polarizing political campaign against conservative whites founded on the idea that they must surrender control of the public institutions they currently dominate?

Let it be said I am a believer in the fact of white privilege, as well as its beneficiary.

There is a special circle in Unzworld Comment Section Hell devoted to flambéing folks who don’t understand that, far from reveling in unearned privilege, Caucasians are not enjoying anywhere near the advantages merited by their genetic and cultural endowments. Well, fire up the barbie.

But…just for the sake of argument…let’s assume that the idea that pruning the white deadwood becomes a top priority for political activists. How would that work?

Pretty well, I think.

The big story over the next thirty five years is the inexorable decline of the white vote from majority to plurality. That kind of demographic trend is bloody chum in the political shark tank.

Some day some opportunistic and charismatic pol is going to stand up and sell the message that it’s time for the old whites to step aside and give the young people of color their shot.

Political happenstance will dictate, I think, how much racial justice and social progress we get, and how much co-option and corruption. And I have a feeling that Hispanic as well as white factors will continue to marginalize black political clout.

But it’s not too early to think about what the war on white privilege might entail, and what choices might be made.

(Republished from China Matters by permission of author or representative)
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. “Some day some opportunistic and charismatic pol is going to stand up and sell the message that it’s time for the old whites to step aside and give the young people of color their shot.”

    Didn’t we already do that in the US in 2008 and 2012? The recent election results are at least partial backlash to the election of a stylish Mulatto who, we have to face it, was a lot cooler than the white Republican duds even before the darker man was deified by the mainstream media.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    The recent election results are at least partial backlash to the election of a stylish Mulatto who, we have to face it, was a lot cooler than the white Republican duds even before the darker man was deified by the mainstream media.
     
    All well and good but most white guys could see through this black empty suit even if they voted for him due to economic self interests. Such as being a Federal or other type govt employee. Or union member. etc. etc

    Phony baloney Husein was always empty suit transparent to me due to a bad experience I had with a slick black lawyer I hired...who blew that case. Such as being a no show at mediation. He gots into an automobile accident at the toll booths you see. And I was dumb enough to take slickster at his word. He was very presentable visually same as Hussein and well spoken in white mode of talking

    The Empty Black Suit - View from the Right
    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011380.html
    The empty black suit Joseph Kay, a professor at a prominent university, explores a fascinating and familiar phenomenon that to my knowledge has never before been.......

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/plee/is-america-ready-for-a-war-on-white-privilege/#comment-1671127
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. An end to white privilege. Hmmmmm…. What might that entail? I suppose it would include whites paying no more than a proportionate share of the income, payroll, property, and sales taxes. After all, a minority should not be expected to pay a disproportionate share of taxes. That is one privilege we can give up.

    Too many whites in Congress can be taken care of by simple amendment to the constitution eliminating Congress. Boom, privilege gone!

    Eliminating the privilege whites have in the military (particularly among the groundpounders and artillerymen) can be accomplished by putting more POC’s into those units, and sink or swim. I bet there are many thousands of POC’s who want to make rank by leading people into battle. Privilege gone!

    White people seem to dominate golf and boating. Either eliminate both, or give club memberships and boats to POC’s and the balance can be restored. Note that POC’s will have to wear bad pants to the club, just like the white boys do.

    It won’t be as hard as you think, solving this white privilege thing. Make all the white people stop doing the things they do, working the jobs they work, and producing all the good things they produce, and soon there will not be so many POC’s around to whine about it. Hell, there won’t even be much food!

    Read More
    • Replies: @george strong
    The author, Peter Lee, demonstrates that Asians do not share decent Americans' values. They have to go back, too.
  3. Asian privilege:

    http://takimag.com/article/tackling_asian_privilege_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz4Rns1G3sr

    https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4

    Jewish privilege:

    White privilege in the US is a myth, unlike (for example) Han privilege in China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4/status/805198020396642304

    Right. Asian Success in America proves that White Privilege is a Lie.
    It’s a Myth, like Bigfoot or Rape Culture.
  4. Race-mongering, on both sides, is a disgrace, profanation of politics, and a recipe for decline and failure. Waste of bandwidth. Fuhgeddaboudit, talk about economics and geopolitics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    This is a nicely done black eye to the stinking DNC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=567SjNPAnrI
  5. I have been white all my life, and have yet to experience so-called white privilege. How anybody can swallow such PC nonsense is beyond me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they're not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.
    , @Hannah Katz
    I recall a Human Resources person tell me in an interview that he wished I was black, as he could hire me on the spot with my qualifications. But sorry, no job. The hired candidate had to be black. Is that white privilege?
  6. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Trump will slaughter the blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle a
    Can you claim that with 100% certainty? Christmas isn't till the 25th.
    , @Randall
    How will he do this?
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Trump will slaughter the blacks.
     
    Why bother? They're doing a fair enough job of that on their own.
  7. Time will get rid of all the old people with white skin, but then there will be young people with white skin. It doesn’t seem that they will ever become a minority small enough for a Final Solution.

    Read More
  8. Let it be said I am a believer in the fact of white privilege, as well as its beneficiary.

    Wait a second, you’re white?

    Jesus, Peter. I’ve been reading you for years and I always thought you were Chinese. Is that like a German “Lee” or what?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle a
    Obviously not like the Bruce variety.
    , @nglaer
    You can be Asian and benefit from white privilege. You have to enjoy living in a society of laws and relatively little discrimination, which many Asians do.
    , @Seth Largo
    Check out his picture at Asia Times.
  9. @Fidelios Automata
    I have been white all my life, and have yet to experience so-called white privilege. How anybody can swallow such PC nonsense is beyond me.

    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stealth

    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.
     
    Are you saying that ironically? If not, can you be a bit more specific?
    , @Mao Cheng Ji

    No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.
     
    Yes, this is what I hear from the liberal race-and-gender-mongers. But if people do perceive, in some situations, white males as normal, and others as suspect, that doesn't mean 'white male privilege'. That's white male normality. You could, perhaps, argue that the others are 'disadvantaged', but that's as far as it goes.

    In any case, your socioeconomic status easily beats all these minor disadvantages. A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males...

    , @Fidelios Automata
    That sounds like something I'm supposed to take on faith. Where's the evidence? Looking at economic statistics, I'd expect than the average East Asian in my place would be doing just as well if not better, due to their culture's admirable work ethic. The average African-American might be doing worse, but what does that prove? Especially considering the existence of diversity quotas and lowered standards for university admissions, they should have caught up by now. I'll come out and say it: the average black is worse off than the average white because they don't take their education seriously, they don't work as hard, and they too often buy the "victim of racism" nonsense. Seriously, how many schools, companies, and realtors can afford to discriminate these days? I'll grant you the occasional "profiling" arrests have harmed the lives of many a young black man, but again, if you know the cops are "out to get you", why take the risk of breaking the law?
    , @Realist
    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.
  10. Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
    Immigrants; who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society. Despite the gibberish of the lunatic left most people recognize this and quite rightly reject the attempt to destroy their society in pursuit of a crazed political fantasy.

    It’s not “White Privilege”

    It’s White Heritage,

    Lee is an asshole.

    Read More
  11. @Anonymous
    Trump will slaughter the blacks.

    Can you claim that with 100% certainty? Christmas isn’t till the 25th.

    Read More
  12. @Jason Liu

    Let it be said I am a believer in the fact of white privilege, as well as its beneficiary.
     
    Wait a second, you're white?

    Jesus, Peter. I've been reading you for years and I always thought you were Chinese. Is that like a German "Lee" or what?

    Obviously not like the Bruce variety.

    Read More
  13. @Jason Liu
    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they're not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.

    Are you saying that ironically? If not, can you be a bit more specific?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Read the volumes of literature the left has put out on "privilege".

    The idea is that a person from a privileged demographic has it better than a non-privileged one, even if he is super poor and disadvantaged, because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman.

    This may be true in some cases, but is generally unprovable. In either case, "I grew up poor!" is not a sufficient counterargument to leftist accusations of privilege. Those on the right need to develop a more substantial critique, namely that privilege is inherently a good thing and should be desired.
  14. @Stealth

    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.
     
    Are you saying that ironically? If not, can you be a bit more specific?

    Read the volumes of literature the left has put out on “privilege”.

    The idea is that a person from a privileged demographic has it better than a non-privileged one, even if he is super poor and disadvantaged, because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman.

    This may be true in some cases, but is generally unprovable. In either case, “I grew up poor!” is not a sufficient counterargument to leftist accusations of privilege. Those on the right need to develop a more substantial critique, namely that privilege is inherently a good thing and should be desired.

    Read More
    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
    Is there any group in America that is more ridiculed and despised by left, right and people of all colors than poor whites? The elites especially hate them, and the believers in white privilege view them as defects, since they couldn't make anything out of their so-called privilege.

    In reality, poor whites are the ones the elite whites punish for their own privilege. How better to signal virtue than to grind other whites to dust and replace them with others? After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren't going to do either.
    , @interesting
    "because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman"


    you have got to be fucking kidding me.......I, due to my skin shade, am labeled racist before i even open my mouth......some fucking privilege. And i don't blame the morons that think that way, most are spoon feed from the cradle the "fact" that humans with a white penis are evil and racist.

    Even YOU just did by claiming that due to my white penis i have it "better" even though I'm on the street and living in cardboard box.......how fucking evil is that?

    and just to be clear, when we talk white privilege we're talking white men only......the evil racists.....right?
  15. The reasons for the so called White Privilege are pretty basic.
    1. We are the meanest SOB’s in the valley.
    2. We have most of the money and guns.
    3. We work our arses off.
    4. We have invented most of the World’s stuff and what we haven’t invented we bought the patents for.
    5. We built infrastructure that has made our Countries the place where everyone wants to live.
    I could go on but it’s not necessary.
    Anyone who thinks they are going to take that or legislate it away from us had better be well organized and packin big time because we will not go quietly.
    Better simmer down, we’ve already invented a burger flipping machine, you need us a lot more than we need you.

    Read More
  16. @Jason Liu
    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they're not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.

    Yes, this is what I hear from the liberal race-and-gender-mongers. But if people do perceive, in some situations, white males as normal, and others as suspect, that doesn’t mean ‘white male privilege’. That’s white male normality. You could, perhaps, argue that the others are ‘disadvantaged’, but that’s as far as it goes.

    In any case, your socioeconomic status easily beats all these minor disadvantages. A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be "normalized", with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.
    , @anonymous
    Basically, they used to argue against racism, but after a while it became apparent that non-whites are usually far more racist than whites, so they had to get specific -- as the target was whites.

    They invented this 'privilege' pucky so it could be attached specifically to whites.

    Of course whites *are* privileged, broadly speaking, but that isn't something that can be changed much, unless there are active measures put in place to hold whites down.

    Since whites built America for the most part, and made up 90% of the population till recently -- they ARE the norm. I guess some people feel they no longer should be since other groups started arriving en mass -- not that whites wanted them to come all that much. But the indians were here first…. bla bla bla… so what can you do?

    There is big big trouble on the horizon. Hopefully I can finish my days in peace before it all goes pop. Thankfully no children.
  17. @Jason Liu
    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they're not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    That sounds like something I’m supposed to take on faith. Where’s the evidence? Looking at economic statistics, I’d expect than the average East Asian in my place would be doing just as well if not better, due to their culture’s admirable work ethic. The average African-American might be doing worse, but what does that prove? Especially considering the existence of diversity quotas and lowered standards for university admissions, they should have caught up by now. I’ll come out and say it: the average black is worse off than the average white because they don’t take their education seriously, they don’t work as hard, and they too often buy the “victim of racism” nonsense. Seriously, how many schools, companies, and realtors can afford to discriminate these days? I’ll grant you the occasional “profiling” arrests have harmed the lives of many a young black man, but again, if you know the cops are “out to get you”, why take the risk of breaking the law?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    There is no evidence. I'm telling you what SJWs think, not what I think. In the leftist mind, privilege discourse is as follows:

    1. Normative majority > Non-normative minority = Privilege
    2. Privilege = Inequality
    3. Inequality = Bad

    Ergo

    4. Privilege = Bad

    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad, mostly because the west has adopted egalitarianism as religion. Without it, privilege discourse falls apart.
    , @Anon
    It is something you're supposed to take on faith. I don't mean to blaspheme, but it's something like the Test Oath; believing in it IDs you as a member of the Righteous Left. It can also be "proved" whenever necessary by establishing that the income or education level or non-incarceration rate -or anything, really- is higher for whites or males or white males than for some other group. The project of attacking white privilege can then be used to fuel a campaign. And since white privilege is not really a measurable quality, it is never affected by any of these attacks, and remains in place to be attacked again the next time the Righteous Left needs to win a campaign, and to be used, as before, as a shibboleth to identify correctly-thinking people.

    Don't blame Jason Liu, though. He's only the messenger.
  18. @Fidelios Automata
    That sounds like something I'm supposed to take on faith. Where's the evidence? Looking at economic statistics, I'd expect than the average East Asian in my place would be doing just as well if not better, due to their culture's admirable work ethic. The average African-American might be doing worse, but what does that prove? Especially considering the existence of diversity quotas and lowered standards for university admissions, they should have caught up by now. I'll come out and say it: the average black is worse off than the average white because they don't take their education seriously, they don't work as hard, and they too often buy the "victim of racism" nonsense. Seriously, how many schools, companies, and realtors can afford to discriminate these days? I'll grant you the occasional "profiling" arrests have harmed the lives of many a young black man, but again, if you know the cops are "out to get you", why take the risk of breaking the law?

    There is no evidence. I’m telling you what SJWs think, not what I think. In the leftist mind, privilege discourse is as follows:

    1. Normative majority > Non-normative minority = Privilege
    2. Privilege = Inequality
    3. Inequality = Bad

    Ergo

    4. Privilege = Bad

    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad, mostly because the west has adopted egalitarianism as religion. Without it, privilege discourse falls apart.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad

    That's only part of it -- inequality is seen as a kind of social pathology, but predominantly when it crosses racial/ethnic lines (everyone accepts that some Whites will be more successful than other Whites) -- here the real "lynchpin" is that this inequality is due to discrimination/racism -- but this is irrational/counter-factual because it ignores significant differences between races, eg average cognitive ability -- the truth is, no matter how level the playing field, and even if 'white privilege' (whatever that is) were completely eliminated (however one might do that), Blacks would still form an underclass.
  19. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Fidelios Automata
    That sounds like something I'm supposed to take on faith. Where's the evidence? Looking at economic statistics, I'd expect than the average East Asian in my place would be doing just as well if not better, due to their culture's admirable work ethic. The average African-American might be doing worse, but what does that prove? Especially considering the existence of diversity quotas and lowered standards for university admissions, they should have caught up by now. I'll come out and say it: the average black is worse off than the average white because they don't take their education seriously, they don't work as hard, and they too often buy the "victim of racism" nonsense. Seriously, how many schools, companies, and realtors can afford to discriminate these days? I'll grant you the occasional "profiling" arrests have harmed the lives of many a young black man, but again, if you know the cops are "out to get you", why take the risk of breaking the law?

    It is something you’re supposed to take on faith. I don’t mean to blaspheme, but it’s something like the Test Oath; believing in it IDs you as a member of the Righteous Left. It can also be “proved” whenever necessary by establishing that the income or education level or non-incarceration rate -or anything, really- is higher for whites or males or white males than for some other group. The project of attacking white privilege can then be used to fuel a campaign. And since white privilege is not really a measurable quality, it is never affected by any of these attacks, and remains in place to be attacked again the next time the Righteous Left needs to win a campaign, and to be used, as before, as a shibboleth to identify correctly-thinking people.

    Don’t blame Jason Liu, though. He’s only the messenger.

    Read More
  20. @Mao Cheng Ji

    No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.
     
    Yes, this is what I hear from the liberal race-and-gender-mongers. But if people do perceive, in some situations, white males as normal, and others as suspect, that doesn't mean 'white male privilege'. That's white male normality. You could, perhaps, argue that the others are 'disadvantaged', but that's as far as it goes.

    In any case, your socioeconomic status easily beats all these minor disadvantages. A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males...

    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be “normalized”, with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    Hi Jason. No, I don't believe that normalcy is privilege.

    To me, 'privilege' involves special treatment, above and beyond what's normal. Rich people do get special treatment - in every area where equality is essential even by the weak liberal standards.

    For example: O. J. Simpson brutally murdered two people - and was acquitted in the 'court of law' because he had enough money and fame.

    And this happens in every area of life: the rich have direct access to politicians that you don't. They will beat you in court, no matter on which side justice lies. They will get life-saving medical treatment before you. Their children will get into universities they wouldn't even dream of otherwise. Etc.

    That's where the real outrage is. Yet for some reason the liberals aren't concerned about any of this at all. Instead they choose to concentrate on minor psychological phenomena (like 'black' sometimes being unconsciously associated with 'underclass') that are far less obvious, and have to be proved by statistical analysis. Why is that? I believe this is a deliberate strategy, a way to distract people from real problems in their society...
    , @Seth Largo
    Liu gets it.
  21. It seems that in far more racially mixed countries than the United States, like Brazil for example, or even in socialist Cuba, the people with the whitest skin rise to the top and dominate their darker compatriots even when the latter are more numerous by orders of magnitude. So white dominance (to call it white privilege is nonsense) is not a matter of numbers. Even if whites were outnumbered in the US they would still in all likelihood be the driving force shaping the cultural and economic landscape of the country. The Democrats lost, despite playing the race card and stoking animosity and division within the country, because the mood in America has shifted in a distinctly more nationalistic and protectionist direction which they failed to anticipate and address. I doubt it’s a consolation for them, but likewise a majority of Republicans were similarly clueless.

    Read More
  22. In a democracy there’s a big, qualitative difference between minority status , i.e., what Negros and other non-White race blocs are now, and plurality status, i.e., what Whites will inherit when they lose their current majority status. Lee mentions that Whites will be a plurality then rambles on as if they will be a minority. Once plurality status kicks in I suspect that Whites will organize themselves as another racial bloc. At that point they get to choose which other racial blocs they will invite to join them in creating a new majority. Negro “big man” leaders have have been such idiots that they’ve permanently alienated large swaths of the White racial bloc and other non-White racial blocs. They will always be too stupid to figure a way out of the permanent, politically unimportant, minority status they have locked themselves into. Whites will still rule; probably even more than they do now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tulip
    In a democracy, the people are your army, and the army of the 50.1% always wins. If the electorate divides on ethnic lines, and whites end up on the losing side of the 50.1%, which will be permanent due to ethnic voting, anything is possible, and I do mean anything. After all, as you know if you have been to college, whites will deserve what they get. There are plenty of high-IQ East Asians around to do the intellectual heavy lifting in Rainbowland, even if you get rid of the whites.
  23. “There is considerable spittle devoting to rebutting the idea” ?

    Poor figure of speech, even worse typo.

    Actually the most obvious oddity about the presidential election is that both candidates were centered in New York.

    Apparently now that Gore Vidal is gone no one is penetrating enough to stumble upon the obvious.

    Does this herald, as Vidal now and then treated, a change in the equilibirum between Washington and New York City? Nowadays between the political and the financial?

    Either way Wall Street, and all that implies, was going to win. With Señor Trump the weight has shifted even more overtly than it would have with Señora Clinton.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    Does this herald, as Vidal now and then treated, a change in the equilibirum between Washington and New York City? Nowadays between the political and the financial?
     
    Washington has always been New York's concubine (Wall Street's, to be specific); 'twas always thus and 'twill always be.
  24. Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    Whites in Ukraine would disagree, point to Japan.

    The answer’s pretty easy:

    Why should whites “privilege” non-whites, when non-whites do not “privilege” whites? It’s not whites’ job to lift up non-whites, that’s non-whites’ job. Asking for something from someone, when you are unwilling to return the favor, is not a winning strategy. Reciprocity is something even school children understand.

    Jason Liu says:
    December 4, 2016 at 1:01 am GMT • 100 Words

    Answer: “now it sounds like you’re arguing for racial separatism.”

    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be “normalized”, with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.

    “Again, sounds like an argument for the universal appeal for racial separatism, and racial nationalism; everybody should have a country where he’s ‘normality.’ Maybe you should stop playing with fire.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Are you talking to me, or the SJWs? This thread has an abundance of people who can't tell the difference between someone describing a group of people, and the group of people being described.

    This is what happens when the phrase "white privilege" triggers knee-jerk responses in white people who call themselves right-wing, but don't actually understand ideological inequality.

    We are not talking between nations. White Ukrainians are the most privileged race in Ukraine. If they weren't, Ukraine would be a morally illegitimate state. Yours and other defensive responses stem from a fear of inequality, otherwise you would embrace privilege as a positive thing.

    I've been arguing for racial separatism and ethno-inequality for all my adult life. Good of you to notice.
  25. @Jason Liu
    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be "normalized", with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.

    Hi Jason. No, I don’t believe that normalcy is privilege.

    To me, ‘privilege’ involves special treatment, above and beyond what’s normal. Rich people do get special treatment – in every area where equality is essential even by the weak liberal standards.

    For example: O. J. Simpson brutally murdered two people – and was acquitted in the ‘court of law’ because he had enough money and fame.

    And this happens in every area of life: the rich have direct access to politicians that you don’t. They will beat you in court, no matter on which side justice lies. They will get life-saving medical treatment before you. Their children will get into universities they wouldn’t even dream of otherwise. Etc.

    That’s where the real outrage is. Yet for some reason the liberals aren’t concerned about any of this at all. Instead they choose to concentrate on minor psychological phenomena (like ‘black’ sometimes being unconsciously associated with ‘underclass’) that are far less obvious, and have to be proved by statistical analysis. Why is that? I believe this is a deliberate strategy, a way to distract people from real problems in their society…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    That's not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race. Class distinctions are usually too academic for the average liberal, race and ethnicity are more primal and easier to rile people up with.
    , @CK
    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
    The prosecution team was sure a jury of women would vote
    guilty.
    The defence team agreed on a jury of women ( black )
    because they knew that race trumps gender in the
    victimization hierarchy.
    Had Simpson been another rich white LosAngeleno
    that same jury would have fried his ass.
  26. @Jason Liu
    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they're not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.

    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.
     
    Nope. God's country, from the start.
  27. I think that the problem of white privilege could be eradicated with legislation crafted along the lines of the Nuremberg Laws targeting those Americans who possess unjust privilege as a result of their European origins.

    The problem would be that certain groups of Democratic allies would presumably be included in the scope of such legislation, and perhaps someone pointing out the legislative origins of such a bold take against white privilege might resonate with their historical memories in uncomfortable ways. I think this is the problem for the Democratic alliance going forward, how to target the bad whites without scaring away the good whites who vote democrat.

    My thought is that whites who pledge their fidelity to life styles that create effective genetic sterility, such as LGBT or unmarried cat women ready to abort any offspring, could and should be exempted from such laws, to serve as court eunuchs, while the rest of the mass of whites should be confined to menial labor. White elites and potential white elites once identified could be sent to anti-racist re-education camps, or liquidated if they cause any trouble.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    White privilege will remain, no matter how it is attacked, because it is not measured, but taken as an article of faith.

    Nor can any serious attempt to actually end it take place, because once it is gone, or, more accurately, generally thought to be gone, the energy of the movement is gone as well. Who need preach in the New Jerusalem?
  28. I think it is also important to start organizing so-called “Anti-Fascist” groups along the lines of the Strumabteilung (SA) so that there is an active force ready to break some eggs in the fight against white supremacy. Ethnic riots are not enough, unless there is a semi-organized anti-racist opposition movement that is at plausibly-denial distant from the political establishment, an opposition movement willing to use direct action against white supremacists, white privilege will not be stopped.

    Read More
  29. @Svigor

    Sure you have. No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.

    You may not agree with that, but at least understand what the SJWs mean when they say white privilege.
     
    Whites in Ukraine would disagree, point to Japan.

    The answer's pretty easy:

    Why should whites "privilege" non-whites, when non-whites do not "privilege" whites? It's not whites' job to lift up non-whites, that's non-whites' job. Asking for something from someone, when you are unwilling to return the favor, is not a winning strategy. Reciprocity is something even school children understand.

    Jason Liu says:
    December 4, 2016 at 1:01 am GMT • 100 Words
    @Fidelios Automata
     
    Answer: "now it sounds like you're arguing for racial separatism."

    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be “normalized”, with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.
     
    "Again, sounds like an argument for the universal appeal for racial separatism, and racial nationalism; everybody should have a country where he's 'normality.' Maybe you should stop playing with fire."

    Are you talking to me, or the SJWs? This thread has an abundance of people who can’t tell the difference between someone describing a group of people, and the group of people being described.

    This is what happens when the phrase “white privilege” triggers knee-jerk responses in white people who call themselves right-wing, but don’t actually understand ideological inequality.

    We are not talking between nations. White Ukrainians are the most privileged race in Ukraine. If they weren’t, Ukraine would be a morally illegitimate state. Yours and other defensive responses stem from a fear of inequality, otherwise you would embrace privilege as a positive thing.

    I’ve been arguing for racial separatism and ethno-inequality for all my adult life. Good of you to notice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stealth
    LOL. I couldn't tell if you were serious or just explaining how others feel when I posted my reply to your comment above. I thought it was a bit ambiguous, so I played it safe and just asked you to clarify.

    Sorry.
    , @old okie
    OK - I'll bite. If you agree with racial separation what are you doing in the west? Just asking.
  30. @Mao Cheng Ji
    Hi Jason. No, I don't believe that normalcy is privilege.

    To me, 'privilege' involves special treatment, above and beyond what's normal. Rich people do get special treatment - in every area where equality is essential even by the weak liberal standards.

    For example: O. J. Simpson brutally murdered two people - and was acquitted in the 'court of law' because he had enough money and fame.

    And this happens in every area of life: the rich have direct access to politicians that you don't. They will beat you in court, no matter on which side justice lies. They will get life-saving medical treatment before you. Their children will get into universities they wouldn't even dream of otherwise. Etc.

    That's where the real outrage is. Yet for some reason the liberals aren't concerned about any of this at all. Instead they choose to concentrate on minor psychological phenomena (like 'black' sometimes being unconsciously associated with 'underclass') that are far less obvious, and have to be proved by statistical analysis. Why is that? I believe this is a deliberate strategy, a way to distract people from real problems in their society...

    That’s not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race. Class distinctions are usually too academic for the average liberal, race and ethnicity are more primal and easier to rile people up with.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    That’s not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race.
     
    Yeah, I know. Like I said, that's their purpose: to distract. To split the working people into small segments, mad at each other, demanding something (no one even knows what it is) from each other, so that the real privileged class - that, naturally, has nothing to do with any silly 'identity', but only with money and power - is safe. Oh well.
    , @WorkingClass
    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It's not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.
  31. @Jus' Sayin'...
    In a democracy there's a big, qualitative difference between minority status , i.e., what Negros and other non-White race blocs are now, and plurality status, i.e., what Whites will inherit when they lose their current majority status. Lee mentions that Whites will be a plurality then rambles on as if they will be a minority. Once plurality status kicks in I suspect that Whites will organize themselves as another racial bloc. At that point they get to choose which other racial blocs they will invite to join them in creating a new majority. Negro "big man" leaders have have been such idiots that they've permanently alienated large swaths of the White racial bloc and other non-White racial blocs. They will always be too stupid to figure a way out of the permanent, politically unimportant, minority status they have locked themselves into. Whites will still rule; probably even more than they do now.

    In a democracy, the people are your army, and the army of the 50.1% always wins. If the electorate divides on ethnic lines, and whites end up on the losing side of the 50.1%, which will be permanent due to ethnic voting, anything is possible, and I do mean anything. After all, as you know if you have been to college, whites will deserve what they get. There are plenty of high-IQ East Asians around to do the intellectual heavy lifting in Rainbowland, even if you get rid of the whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    Judging from events in Compton I doubt soi disant "Hispanics" are ever going to unite with Negroes. "Hispanics" tend to identify with Whites. The only individuals I have known who loath Negroes more than "Hispanic" individuals are "Asian" individuals of various nationalities. These "Asians" seem, in fact, to prefer Whites over "Negroes" and "Hispanics".

    I have not only "been to college", I have a Ph.D. I never took a course teaching me that "whites will deserve what they get". Based on your rhetorical and reasoning skills I suspect that even if you "have been to college" you probably majored in some x-studies program, which brings to mund the old ad campaign, "A human mind is a terrible thing to waste."
    , @Alfa158
    High IQ East Asians have zero (0) interest in doing their intellectual heavy lifting for the benefit of the low performers in Rainbowland like Blacks, Muslims, Mestizos, Pacific Islanders etc. If they take over from Whites, they aren't going to tolerate affirmative action, further immigration, crime, subsidization through welfare of being out-bred, and so forth. They will exercise their privilege, and they will exercise it good and hard. Enjoy your brave new world.
  32. @fnn
    Asian privilege:
    http://takimag.com/article/tackling_asian_privilege_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz4Rns1G3sr

    https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4

    Jewish privilege:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdbOOalrTSA&t=6s

    White privilege in the US is a myth, unlike (for example) Han privilege in China.
    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can't be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth.

    (this doesn't mean that privilege due to being the historical majority, and to being productive, is unnatural or wrong)
  33. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Tulip
    I think that the problem of white privilege could be eradicated with legislation crafted along the lines of the Nuremberg Laws targeting those Americans who possess unjust privilege as a result of their European origins.

    The problem would be that certain groups of Democratic allies would presumably be included in the scope of such legislation, and perhaps someone pointing out the legislative origins of such a bold take against white privilege might resonate with their historical memories in uncomfortable ways. I think this is the problem for the Democratic alliance going forward, how to target the bad whites without scaring away the good whites who vote democrat.

    My thought is that whites who pledge their fidelity to life styles that create effective genetic sterility, such as LGBT or unmarried cat women ready to abort any offspring, could and should be exempted from such laws, to serve as court eunuchs, while the rest of the mass of whites should be confined to menial labor. White elites and potential white elites once identified could be sent to anti-racist re-education camps, or liquidated if they cause any trouble.

    White privilege will remain, no matter how it is attacked, because it is not measured, but taken as an article of faith.

    Nor can any serious attempt to actually end it take place, because once it is gone, or, more accurately, generally thought to be gone, the energy of the movement is gone as well. Who need preach in the New Jerusalem?

    Read More
  34. @Mao Cheng Ji
    Hi Jason. No, I don't believe that normalcy is privilege.

    To me, 'privilege' involves special treatment, above and beyond what's normal. Rich people do get special treatment - in every area where equality is essential even by the weak liberal standards.

    For example: O. J. Simpson brutally murdered two people - and was acquitted in the 'court of law' because he had enough money and fame.

    And this happens in every area of life: the rich have direct access to politicians that you don't. They will beat you in court, no matter on which side justice lies. They will get life-saving medical treatment before you. Their children will get into universities they wouldn't even dream of otherwise. Etc.

    That's where the real outrage is. Yet for some reason the liberals aren't concerned about any of this at all. Instead they choose to concentrate on minor psychological phenomena (like 'black' sometimes being unconsciously associated with 'underclass') that are far less obvious, and have to be proved by statistical analysis. Why is that? I believe this is a deliberate strategy, a way to distract people from real problems in their society...

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
    The prosecution team was sure a jury of women would vote
    guilty.
    The defence team agreed on a jury of women ( black )
    because they knew that race trumps gender in the
    victimization hierarchy.
    Had Simpson been another rich white LosAngeleno
    that same jury would have fried his ass.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
     
    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you're describing, I don't know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it's a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff - black or white or blue or yellow - he would've probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would've made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.
    , @Anon
    I wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?
    , @Hibernian
    The legal arguments made by the "dream team" gave the jurors plausible deniability. Most of them probably didn't need that, but one juror can hang the jury.
  35. Take the fictional White Privilege away from America and what is left is Haiti. Take Black Privilege away from America and crime rates plummet, schools become institutions of learning again, 5/8ths of the prisons will be closed, drug addiction and murder rates will virtually disappear.

    Read More
  36. @CK
    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
    The prosecution team was sure a jury of women would vote
    guilty.
    The defence team agreed on a jury of women ( black )
    because they knew that race trumps gender in the
    victimization hierarchy.
    Had Simpson been another rich white LosAngeleno
    that same jury would have fried his ass.

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.

    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you’re describing, I don’t know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it’s a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff – black or white or blue or yellow – he would’ve probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would’ve made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    So then, how much was each juror paid?
    , @Authenticjazzman
    BS : If Simpson had been white he could have had billions at his disposal and the jury would still have hung him.
    You have no fricking clue, as usual.

    Authenticjazzman, " Mensa" society member since 1973 and pro jazz artist.
    , @CK
    Those minor technical details are what sets the guilty free and not attending to them puts the innocent away. Technically Simpson's attorneys had the same voir dire process available to them as the prosecution. Technically the prosecution could have offered him a deal the same as they offer any stiff. They didn't offer, and both sides agreed that a black female jury was certainly the cat's pajamas for each side. Race trumps sex.
    If Johnnie Cochran had thought that he could not win in LA he would have asked for a change of venue; but why change when the jury is loaded in your favour.
    , @Fran Macadam
    The gloves didn't fit and the main police officer witness proved himself to not only be bigoted but a serial liar.
  37. @Jason Liu
    That's not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race. Class distinctions are usually too academic for the average liberal, race and ethnicity are more primal and easier to rile people up with.

    That’s not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race.

    Yeah, I know. Like I said, that’s their purpose: to distract. To split the working people into small segments, mad at each other, demanding something (no one even knows what it is) from each other, so that the real privileged class – that, naturally, has nothing to do with any silly ‘identity’, but only with money and power – is safe. Oh well.

    Read More
  38. @Jason Liu
    That's not what the SJWs think. They would accuse you of using class to derail from race. Class distinctions are usually too academic for the average liberal, race and ethnicity are more primal and easier to rile people up with.

    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It’s not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinPNW
    I've heard the claim that elites promoting racism to avoid discussion of class goes back to Virginia planters of the 16th century pitting white and Irish slaves and indentured servants against black slaves to prevent them from joining together to make demands of or to overthrow their masters
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them.
     
    The real working "class" believes the number of Mexicans allowed to immigrate to this country should be zero. The Mexican immigrant working class believes the number of Mexicans allowed to immigrate to this country should be large enough to include themselves. Try and build a "class" out of that.

    The white working class does not want to live next door to the black working class, not because some intellectuals paid by plutocrats hoodwinked them, but because there are real consequences to living next door to them-- let alone next to the black non-working class!

    The black working class probably would prefer to avoid the white working class as well, but they're the only whites they can afford to live near, and any whites at all are a step up for them, quality-of-lifewise.

    It’s not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.
     
    "It's not just liberals who buy the idea" of heliocentrism, or of natural selection. "Many of the commenters here agree with it."

    Reality, and experience thereof, might have a part to play in this. Give this "working class" you pretend to speak for credit for knowing a thing or two. Otherwise, you're just Hillary, with a dash of Bernie for spice.
    , @dfordoom

    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It’s not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.
     
    Yep. It's a strategy that is working out very well for the elites.
    , @pelagic
    A good insight but the two categories are not comparable. Class standing can be changed, race cannot.
  39. @Tulip
    In a democracy, the people are your army, and the army of the 50.1% always wins. If the electorate divides on ethnic lines, and whites end up on the losing side of the 50.1%, which will be permanent due to ethnic voting, anything is possible, and I do mean anything. After all, as you know if you have been to college, whites will deserve what they get. There are plenty of high-IQ East Asians around to do the intellectual heavy lifting in Rainbowland, even if you get rid of the whites.

    Judging from events in Compton I doubt soi disant “Hispanics” are ever going to unite with Negroes. “Hispanics” tend to identify with Whites. The only individuals I have known who loath Negroes more than “Hispanic” individuals are “Asian” individuals of various nationalities. These “Asians” seem, in fact, to prefer Whites over “Negroes” and “Hispanics”.

    I have not only “been to college”, I have a Ph.D. I never took a course teaching me that “whites will deserve what they get”. Based on your rhetorical and reasoning skills I suspect that even if you “have been to college” you probably majored in some x-studies program, which brings to mund the old ad campaign, “A human mind is a terrible thing to waste.”

    Read More
  40. @Jason Liu
    Are you talking to me, or the SJWs? This thread has an abundance of people who can't tell the difference between someone describing a group of people, and the group of people being described.

    This is what happens when the phrase "white privilege" triggers knee-jerk responses in white people who call themselves right-wing, but don't actually understand ideological inequality.

    We are not talking between nations. White Ukrainians are the most privileged race in Ukraine. If they weren't, Ukraine would be a morally illegitimate state. Yours and other defensive responses stem from a fear of inequality, otherwise you would embrace privilege as a positive thing.

    I've been arguing for racial separatism and ethno-inequality for all my adult life. Good of you to notice.

    LOL. I couldn’t tell if you were serious or just explaining how others feel when I posted my reply to your comment above. I thought it was a bit ambiguous, so I played it safe and just asked you to clarify.

    Sorry.

    Read More
  41. @Tulip
    In a democracy, the people are your army, and the army of the 50.1% always wins. If the electorate divides on ethnic lines, and whites end up on the losing side of the 50.1%, which will be permanent due to ethnic voting, anything is possible, and I do mean anything. After all, as you know if you have been to college, whites will deserve what they get. There are plenty of high-IQ East Asians around to do the intellectual heavy lifting in Rainbowland, even if you get rid of the whites.

    High IQ East Asians have zero (0) interest in doing their intellectual heavy lifting for the benefit of the low performers in Rainbowland like Blacks, Muslims, Mestizos, Pacific Islanders etc. If they take over from Whites, they aren’t going to tolerate affirmative action, further immigration, crime, subsidization through welfare of being out-bred, and so forth. They will exercise their privilege, and they will exercise it good and hard. Enjoy your brave new world.

    Read More
  42. @Brian Reilly
    An end to white privilege. Hmmmmm.... What might that entail? I suppose it would include whites paying no more than a proportionate share of the income, payroll, property, and sales taxes. After all, a minority should not be expected to pay a disproportionate share of taxes. That is one privilege we can give up.

    Too many whites in Congress can be taken care of by simple amendment to the constitution eliminating Congress. Boom, privilege gone!

    Eliminating the privilege whites have in the military (particularly among the groundpounders and artillerymen) can be accomplished by putting more POC's into those units, and sink or swim. I bet there are many thousands of POC's who want to make rank by leading people into battle. Privilege gone!

    White people seem to dominate golf and boating. Either eliminate both, or give club memberships and boats to POC's and the balance can be restored. Note that POC's will have to wear bad pants to the club, just like the white boys do.

    It won't be as hard as you think, solving this white privilege thing. Make all the white people stop doing the things they do, working the jobs they work, and producing all the good things they produce, and soon there will not be so many POC's around to whine about it. Hell, there won't even be much food!

    The author, Peter Lee, demonstrates that Asians do not share decent Americans’ values. They have to go back, too.

    Read More
  43. from the article:

    White privilege issues took a dirt nap during the general…

    But I saw inklings of it back in June, when John Lewis organized a sit-in of Democrats on the floor of the House of Representatives to protest Republican inaction on gun control following the Pulse nightclub massacre.

    WTF??? If it’s this guy’s intention to say things that have no coherent thought or reasoning, can’t he do it in less than 40 paragraphs?

    Read More
  44. Thousands of illicit entitlements gifted to diversity people by federal government laws.

    Diversity By Group: African American, Alternate Lifestyle, Asian, Disabled, Hispanic & Latino, Jewish, Native American, Women

    http://www.mindexchange.com/diversity.htm

    Federal diversity entitlements are inducements for diversity people to regularly vote for diversity promoting politicians.

    So-called white privilege is ordinary psychological projection by diversity people.

    As an example, here are some illicit federal sponsored entitlements currently enjoyed by Afro-black diversity people:

    [MORE]

    1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
    2. Government 8A set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
    3. Deliberate media and government misrepresentation of massive Afro-black crime wave
    4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
    5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, BLM, Blood and Crips, Nation of Islam, Million Man March)
    6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and afro-black scholarship programs
    7. Unprosecuted afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
    8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
    9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
    10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
    11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
    12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
    13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy government employment
    14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
    15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
    16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich protected class people
    17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
    18. Afro-black majority city’s bailout by county, state and federal taxpayer
    19. Afro-black history month
    20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
    21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
    22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
    23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black false flag hate crimes
    24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
    25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
    26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
    27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
    28. Afro-black athletes glorified by mass media
    29. Afro-black on white people crime rate is lopsided and extreme
    30. President of the US promotes undue privileges for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
    31. Afro-black only organizations allowed by law, white-only organizations outlawed
    32. BLM terrorist demand and receive reduced policing in black majority areas
    33. Feds assist Afro-blacks to extort money and concessions from local city tax payers
    34. White Privilege crap taught in public schools.
    35 Afro-black wilding assaults, flash mob robbery, and knockout game is rampant and unprosecuted.
    36. Black scholarships allowed in public colleges, white scholarships are illegal.
    37. Feds give tax money to immigrant negroes to bribe them not to join ISIS.
    38. Lowered academic standards for afro-blacks and other diversity people in public service jobs
    39. Federal government coerces private businesses to implement diversity policies, or else suffer federal prosecution, denial of tax breaks and business licenses, and denial of federal contracts.
    40. Criminal blacks conspire to assassinate police, no hate crime charges and no domestic terrorism label

    Read More
  45. But this is the problem, to wit as it were [quote]this country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.”[/quote]
    1. The white Europeans found indigenous people living here. When you go someplace and no one is there, it is only then that one may say that ‘we discovered that”.
    2. Taking land from someone does not mean you originally owned it. That is theft. Then you put the owners on reservations, deny them compensations and when they complain, you ask them for title of said land. Yes, the theft of the land was wonderful but nothing more. Taking pride in that theft is another matter.
    3. Based on the deceit, manipualtion ,etc then from the beginning, it was meant to be the white man’s land. Absolutely correct and that cannot be denied.
    Amen

    Read More
    • Replies: @martin2
    It is true to say that European discovered America,despite the fact that the Red Indians were there before Europeans. Just because humans breathed oxygen before Priestley isolated it and Lavoisier learnt what it does this doesn't mean that these scientists did not discover oxygen. The man that found dinosaur fossils thought they were animals that died in Noah's flood, it was Richard Owen that discovered dinosaurs, because he realised what they were, that is to say, their place in the scheme of nature. Similarly, the Europeans that landed in America discovered America since they were able to place America in the context of a (correct) theory about the Earth, it's being round, having seas and continents, and so on. The Red Indians had no such theory, or if they did it was wrong.
  46. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mao Cheng Ji

    No matter how bad your life is, a nonwhite in your situation will have it worse, because they’re not white.
     
    Yes, this is what I hear from the liberal race-and-gender-mongers. But if people do perceive, in some situations, white males as normal, and others as suspect, that doesn't mean 'white male privilege'. That's white male normality. You could, perhaps, argue that the others are 'disadvantaged', but that's as far as it goes.

    In any case, your socioeconomic status easily beats all these minor disadvantages. A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males...

    Basically, they used to argue against racism, but after a while it became apparent that non-whites are usually far more racist than whites, so they had to get specific — as the target was whites.

    They invented this ‘privilege’ pucky so it could be attached specifically to whites.

    Of course whites *are* privileged, broadly speaking, but that isn’t something that can be changed much, unless there are active measures put in place to hold whites down.

    Since whites built America for the most part, and made up 90% of the population till recently — they ARE the norm. I guess some people feel they no longer should be since other groups started arriving en mass — not that whites wanted them to come all that much. But the indians were here first…. bla bla bla… so what can you do?

    There is big big trouble on the horizon. Hopefully I can finish my days in peace before it all goes pop. Thankfully no children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    "Thankfully no children." Then you are part of the problem.

    Thanks for failing to do the hard work to leave people behind, when you're gone, who could have voted, and worked, and marched, and if necessary fought beside our children.
  47. I will always respect the insight of Bill Moyers…the real stooges, in my opinion, include those blinded by the vigorous sociopathic cunning of Donald Trump and his surrogates. While they will stymie a war on white privilege, it will have nothing to do with genuine feelings that such a battle is not warranted… it will have EVERYTHING to do with making the rich richer, Trump in particular. I am an affluent, highly educated [white] individual who loathes much of the top 1 percent. No, it’s not jealousy; it’s that I have a conscience. We must level the playing ground, all the while being careful not to gratuitously dole out monies to those who truly did little to merit our generosity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    LPG:

    Bill Moyers was/is Lyndon Johnson's bagman!
  48. Yes, let’s eliminate the white stock that created this once great country. Then we’ll have another third world hellhole on this planet. Solid thinking there, Mr. Lee.

    That is probably what you truly desire, as I assume you will be living in China if and when your dystopian vision for the USA occurs. The Chinese are so welcoming to Non-Han outsiders.

    Read More
  49. @WorkingClass
    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It's not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    I’ve heard the claim that elites promoting racism to avoid discussion of class goes back to Virginia planters of the 16th century pitting white and Irish slaves and indentured servants against black slaves to prevent them from joining together to make demands of or to overthrow their masters

    Read More
  50. I will gladly give up the white privilege of paying the bills of blacks & browns.

    The irrational anti white racists should be careful what they ask for.

    Read More
  51. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
     
    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you're describing, I don't know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it's a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff - black or white or blue or yellow - he would've probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would've made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.

    So then, how much was each juror paid?

    Read More
  52. The reality is the opposite; whites have much less “privilege” than they are entitled too.

    This is because for every perceived “privilege,” an historic fee has been often been paid, sometimes in gold, other times in sweat, and even more expensively, in blood. It’s those who have put the most into shaping the present who should enjoy the benefits. “For us an for our posterity” isn’t an empty turn of phrase.

    How much historic cultural capital did the ancestors of Syrian refugees produce by battling frostbite at Valley Forge? Where were the Somalis in 1812, when the capital was ravaged and scattered patriots struggled to link up and muster some kind of defense? Where were the ancestors of the Guatemalan illegals at Omaha Beach? I have an ancestor at all three, and it was those men who paid the cost for me to be the boss. If others want such “privilege,” they must do the work. They can start by internalizing the traditional values and virtues as laid down by the founders. Until they do this they are always going to be nothing more than the kid sleeping over. They will never be part of the family.

    You cannot truly be a citizen of a Republic if military service is completely rejected a priori. You can’t be an “American worker” if you don’t work hard, set down roots, and plan to become “of the land” on a long-term basis. In my family’s instance, we even have Indian roots. Many do.

    This is the advantage we have, and what the left absolutely cannot stand; America is OURS in a way that will never be theirs. It’s the way that Korea belongs to the Koreans, Japan to the Japanese, and England to the English. Most peoples of the world migrated at some point. However if long-standing roots are present, a people can be said to be irrevocably and legitimately “of”
    a place.

    WWII made us wealthy beyond comprehension. Those who wish to enjoy that prosperity should defer to the posterity of those who secured it.

    Regarding Lee, I thought the article was insightful, but he is gravely mistaken about the future:

    Anglo man simply cannot be enslaved. He is genetically unruly. It is far more likely that after “old whites” die that “young whites” reforge the nation of their ancestors, than it woukd be for them to accept slavery under the less capable and illegitimate. Especially seeing as how the white population in virtually every Western country is undergoing a massive evolutionary bottleneck. Yes whites will be less in 2050, but they will be our children and they will absolutely pop the hell off if they are threatened. The cucked whites are much less fecund. As for the Minorities, they have always enjoyed the benefit of numbers on a global scale- it doesn’t take many committed whites to bring them to heel. The Portuguese wrecked the massive Kingdom of the Kongo with just a handful of soldiers, despite the Kongolese king wielding a massive army with a multitude of firearms, sold to him by the very Portuguese who later crushed him.
    America in 2100 could much more closely resemble America in 1900 than Lee suggests.

    All we need is a decent, committed portion of our own people willing to muster their courage.

    Read More
    • Agree: CK
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
    Great post, couldn't have said it better myself.

    Authenticjazzman, "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    , @eah
    “For us an for our posterity” isn’t an empty turn of phrase.

    Thanks for your excellent comment.

    ...an historic fee has been often been paid...Where were...

    I realized the same thing some time ago, and have used this argument when discussing the general subject with others, including recently: one of the things that most disgusts me about this whole 'migration' issue is the way these people are just given things -- eg life in a first world country -- that they and people like them have in no way earned.
    , @BenKenobi
    Hear, hear!
    , @RadicalCenter
    I hope you're right. You know how to reason, how to write, and how to inspire, that's for sure.

    I fear, though, that what white Americans and our allies -- including millions of half-white, half-Asian Americans like our children -- will win is a territorially, economically, and therefore militarily diminished USA. Mexicans and their descendants here will be very difficult to dislodge from much of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, inter alia, even with full-scale civil war (a terrible prospect for good people of all backgrounds). But we must try to regain and restore our country.
  53. @Jason Liu
    There is no evidence. I'm telling you what SJWs think, not what I think. In the leftist mind, privilege discourse is as follows:

    1. Normative majority > Non-normative minority = Privilege
    2. Privilege = Inequality
    3. Inequality = Bad

    Ergo

    4. Privilege = Bad

    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad, mostly because the west has adopted egalitarianism as religion. Without it, privilege discourse falls apart.

    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad

    That’s only part of it — inequality is seen as a kind of social pathology, but predominantly when it crosses racial/ethnic lines (everyone accepts that some Whites will be more successful than other Whites) — here the real “lynchpin” is that this inequality is due to discrimination/racism — but this is irrational/counter-factual because it ignores significant differences between races, eg average cognitive ability — the truth is, no matter how level the playing field, and even if ‘white privilege’ (whatever that is) were completely eliminated (however one might do that), Blacks would still form an underclass.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    — but this is irrational/counter-factual because it ignores significant differences between races, eg average cognitive ability.
     
    The more factual reality is that elites (all IQ's) protect themselves with Patronage (gatekeepers) and the "level playing field" (for e.g. cognitive ability) doesn't apply. Power positions in society are often reserved (as they were in Middle Ages feudal Europe).

    In academia and the media new entrants are vetted for PC views, and Jews in particular deploy racial patronage to obtain and hold a dominant positions. For example racial patronage rocketed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court (where she's returning the favor), or the long line of patronage enabled Jewish FED chairmen. Cognitive ability may be a minor factor but many other potential Anglo candidates with the same or superior cognitive ability never get into the competition - because there is no competition. That's how racial patronage works.
  54. Wanna see “white privilege” at its finest?

    Google “sexy white women”. Then replace white with black and search again.

    You see the privilege? Its the fact white people are taught decency.

    Read More
  55. “The political conditions were deemed to be ripe, since demographic and electoral shifts had forced the NRA in a deep, virtually monogamous relationship with the Republican Party and allowed the Democrats to seize the moral and political high ground as both national unifiers and gun control advocates.”

    This belief is the cause of the confusion and dissonance felt by those that impotently shake their fist at the sky at that which they don’t understand.

    Let’s do the math. There are now well over 80,000,000 owners of personal firearms in America. They are in possession of now well over 300,000,000 firearms. The NRA has what…maybe…5M members?

    That means there are 75+ Million gun owners that have nothing to do with the NRA. These people span all political affiliations, as well as all racial and gender demographics. They are hardly all ‘wascally-wepubwiccans”. There are 10′s of millions of Democrat gun owners, a number that dwarfs NRA membership.

    Yes the NRA has influence but these gun owners are known to their legislators because they communicate, a lot, and more importantly they do the one thing the NRA does not do…they actually vote.

    Read More
  56. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
     
    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you're describing, I don't know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it's a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff - black or white or blue or yellow - he would've probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would've made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.

    BS : If Simpson had been white he could have had billions at his disposal and the jury would still have hung him.
    You have no fricking clue, as usual.

    Authenticjazzman, ” Mensa” society member since 1973 and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
  57. Gun control as a democrat terrain ha ha ha : My brother in a law, a Cadillac driving high ranking union official and of course democrat, owns dozens of guns.

    And of course the nut-case democrat and rabid gun-control california political hack with the CCP.

    As always it boils down to the democrat credo : “Don’t do as I do do as I say”.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
  58. @Seneca44
    "Some day some opportunistic and charismatic pol is going to stand up and sell the message that it’s time for the old whites to step aside and give the young people of color their shot."

    Didn't we already do that in the US in 2008 and 2012? The recent election results are at least partial backlash to the election of a stylish Mulatto who, we have to face it, was a lot cooler than the white Republican duds even before the darker man was deified by the mainstream media.

    The recent election results are at least partial backlash to the election of a stylish Mulatto who, we have to face it, was a lot cooler than the white Republican duds even before the darker man was deified by the mainstream media.

    All well and good but most white guys could see through this black empty suit even if they voted for him due to economic self interests. Such as being a Federal or other type govt employee. Or union member. etc. etc

    Phony baloney Husein was always empty suit transparent to me due to a bad experience I had with a slick black lawyer I hired…who blew that case. Such as being a no show at mediation. He gots into an automobile accident at the toll booths you see. And I was dumb enough to take slickster at his word. He was very presentable visually same as Hussein and well spoken in white mode of talking

    The Empty Black Suit – View from the Right

    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011380.html

    The empty black suit Joseph Kay, a professor at a prominent university, explores a fascinating and familiar phenomenon that to my knowledge has never before been…….

    Read More
  59. Mr. Lee, in his innocence, is apparently unaware of a number of other possible futures that do not include “inexorable” white demographic decline in this country. Perhaps he lacks imagination or simply does not want to face facts about what can happen to minorities which try to displace majorities. If you think Mr. Trump is the ultimate expression of white anger you are sadly mistaken.

    Read More
  60. @Preston Brooks
    The reality is the opposite; whites have much less "privilege" than they are entitled too.

    This is because for every perceived "privilege," an historic fee has been often been paid, sometimes in gold, other times in sweat, and even more expensively, in blood. It's those who have put the most into shaping the present who should enjoy the benefits. "For us an for our posterity" isn't an empty turn of phrase.

    How much historic cultural capital did the ancestors of Syrian refugees produce by battling frostbite at Valley Forge? Where were the Somalis in 1812, when the capital was ravaged and scattered patriots struggled to link up and muster some kind of defense? Where were the ancestors of the Guatemalan illegals at Omaha Beach? I have an ancestor at all three, and it was those men who paid the cost for me to be the boss. If others want such "privilege," they must do the work. They can start by internalizing the traditional values and virtues as laid down by the founders. Until they do this they are always going to be nothing more than the kid sleeping over. They will never be part of the family.

    You cannot truly be a citizen of a Republic if military service is completely rejected a priori. You can't be an "American worker" if you don't work hard, set down roots, and plan to become "of the land" on a long-term basis. In my family's instance, we even have Indian roots. Many do.

    This is the advantage we have, and what the left absolutely cannot stand; America is OURS in a way that will never be theirs. It's the way that Korea belongs to the Koreans, Japan to the Japanese, and England to the English. Most peoples of the world migrated at some point. However if long-standing roots are present, a people can be said to be irrevocably and legitimately "of"
    a place.

    WWII made us wealthy beyond comprehension. Those who wish to enjoy that prosperity should defer to the posterity of those who secured it.

    Regarding Lee, I thought the article was insightful, but he is gravely mistaken about the future:

    Anglo man simply cannot be enslaved. He is genetically unruly. It is far more likely that after "old whites" die that "young whites" reforge the nation of their ancestors, than it woukd be for them to accept slavery under the less capable and illegitimate. Especially seeing as how the white population in virtually every Western country is undergoing a massive evolutionary bottleneck. Yes whites will be less in 2050, but they will be our children and they will absolutely pop the hell off if they are threatened. The cucked whites are much less fecund. As for the Minorities, they have always enjoyed the benefit of numbers on a global scale- it doesn't take many committed whites to bring them to heel. The Portuguese wrecked the massive Kingdom of the Kongo with just a handful of soldiers, despite the Kongolese king wielding a massive army with a multitude of firearms, sold to him by the very Portuguese who later crushed him.
    America in 2100 could much more closely resemble America in 1900 than Lee suggests.

    All we need is a decent, committed portion of our own people willing to muster their courage.

    Great post, couldn’t have said it better myself.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
  61. @fnn
    https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4/status/805198020396642304

    Right. Asian Success in America proves that White Privilege is a Lie.
    It’s a Myth, like Bigfoot or Rape Culture.

    Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can’t be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth.

    (this doesn’t mean that privilege due to being the historical majority, and to being productive, is unnatural or wrong)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can’t be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth."

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.

    I have never heard of female escorts charging her White male clients less than their Black male clients.

    I have never heard of banks lending thousands or millions of dollars to White people with bad credit.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.
  62. “The big story over the next thirty five years is the inexorable decline of the white vote from majority to plurality”

    Indeed–and at the current rate possibly even sooner. By the next century whites probably won’t even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority. Most of us won’t be around to see it, so we can only speculate at how much in-fighting there will be among the non-whites who will be fill the majoritarian vacuum and which group will attain plurality status within that majority. Given their current birthrate, however, it will most assuredly NOT be the blacks. And there is no small irony in that possibility.

    In any event,bet the farm that in the long, long run although the players will have changed the narrative will remain the same, the tired old arguments dressed up in new form. “Plus ca change ” etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    By the next century whites probably won’t even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority.
     
    This is actually not likely. The Hispanic birth rate is slowing down and approaching that of whites.

    http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2015/11/27/birth-rates-among-latinas-at-all-time-low-as-their-prosperity-continues-to-grow/

    Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans).

    There is little doubt that whites will become a plurality because it will take a generation for Hispanics to achieve more-or-less white fertility rates; already whites are a very slim minority of new births. I'd guess the long-term future will probably have whites (including those who might have a Mexican or Puerto Rican grandparent) at around 45%, vs. 15% black, 10% Asian and 30% Hispanic.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Not much to speculate about: it is the Mexicans who will be the largest racial group, i.e., a plurality, and they'll almost certainly be the solid majority in our two most populous States, California and Texas. Not too far in the future, either.
  63. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
     
    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you're describing, I don't know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it's a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff - black or white or blue or yellow - he would've probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would've made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.

    Those minor technical details are what sets the guilty free and not attending to them puts the innocent away. Technically Simpson’s attorneys had the same voir dire process available to them as the prosecution. Technically the prosecution could have offered him a deal the same as they offer any stiff. They didn’t offer, and both sides agreed that a black female jury was certainly the cat’s pajamas for each side. Race trumps sex.
    If Johnnie Cochran had thought that he could not win in LA he would have asked for a change of venue; but why change when the jury is loaded in your favour.

    Read More
  64. @Jason Liu

    Let it be said I am a believer in the fact of white privilege, as well as its beneficiary.
     
    Wait a second, you're white?

    Jesus, Peter. I've been reading you for years and I always thought you were Chinese. Is that like a German "Lee" or what?

    You can be Asian and benefit from white privilege. You have to enjoy living in a society of laws and relatively little discrimination, which many Asians do.

    Read More
  65. Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    That article is extremely well-written

    http://takimag.com/article/how_the_left_strangled_itself_with_identity_politics_jim_goad/print#comment-3036208463

    the prose is nicely wry and the shiv expertly wielded
  66. why is it when awkward or ugly , socially inept losers in high school who didn’t get the pretty cheerleader of their night sweats and covetous obsession- always in adulthood morph into odious, sanctimonious, eternally butt-hurt, obnoxious identity politics warriors?

    do they see all the pretty white girls with Negros on TV and (not so pretty) at WalMart to represent some elusive hope- if they too can just guilt one elusive pretty blonde into feeling sorry enough for them, and finally realize their pitiful longings and hopes?

    start at 1:25 to 1:40

    yea, it must feel like the Hover Dam with all that pent up pressure and thwarted desire

    seeing her with the football captain, kissing and smooching, and she didn’t even know you existed! And all those poor prostitutes and street walkers since just don’t seem to patch that terrible void in your soul.

    what a trajectory such emotionally momentous teenage experiences put some people on, eh?

    Well, they say a good writer is motivated by passions and angst, so perhaps if you keep tweaking your butt-hurt, it might one day sound like something else.

    Read More
  67. Those minor technical details are what sets the guilty free

    Sure, but my point is that it was his money that allowed him to hire the ‘dream team’, who then devised and executed their plans to influence the jury and the media, to pressure the judge and the prosecution, to dig up dirt on the cop in charge and on the lab, and all the rest.

    So, there are plenty of details, but there’s only one condition, one prerequisite for them all: the money. And if these particular steps were not feasible, his army of lawyers would’ve devised and executed some other plan, with some different details. So, details are not important, the amount of resources, the money is. What’s so complicated here?

    Read More
  68. @Preston Brooks
    The reality is the opposite; whites have much less "privilege" than they are entitled too.

    This is because for every perceived "privilege," an historic fee has been often been paid, sometimes in gold, other times in sweat, and even more expensively, in blood. It's those who have put the most into shaping the present who should enjoy the benefits. "For us an for our posterity" isn't an empty turn of phrase.

    How much historic cultural capital did the ancestors of Syrian refugees produce by battling frostbite at Valley Forge? Where were the Somalis in 1812, when the capital was ravaged and scattered patriots struggled to link up and muster some kind of defense? Where were the ancestors of the Guatemalan illegals at Omaha Beach? I have an ancestor at all three, and it was those men who paid the cost for me to be the boss. If others want such "privilege," they must do the work. They can start by internalizing the traditional values and virtues as laid down by the founders. Until they do this they are always going to be nothing more than the kid sleeping over. They will never be part of the family.

    You cannot truly be a citizen of a Republic if military service is completely rejected a priori. You can't be an "American worker" if you don't work hard, set down roots, and plan to become "of the land" on a long-term basis. In my family's instance, we even have Indian roots. Many do.

    This is the advantage we have, and what the left absolutely cannot stand; America is OURS in a way that will never be theirs. It's the way that Korea belongs to the Koreans, Japan to the Japanese, and England to the English. Most peoples of the world migrated at some point. However if long-standing roots are present, a people can be said to be irrevocably and legitimately "of"
    a place.

    WWII made us wealthy beyond comprehension. Those who wish to enjoy that prosperity should defer to the posterity of those who secured it.

    Regarding Lee, I thought the article was insightful, but he is gravely mistaken about the future:

    Anglo man simply cannot be enslaved. He is genetically unruly. It is far more likely that after "old whites" die that "young whites" reforge the nation of their ancestors, than it woukd be for them to accept slavery under the less capable and illegitimate. Especially seeing as how the white population in virtually every Western country is undergoing a massive evolutionary bottleneck. Yes whites will be less in 2050, but they will be our children and they will absolutely pop the hell off if they are threatened. The cucked whites are much less fecund. As for the Minorities, they have always enjoyed the benefit of numbers on a global scale- it doesn't take many committed whites to bring them to heel. The Portuguese wrecked the massive Kingdom of the Kongo with just a handful of soldiers, despite the Kongolese king wielding a massive army with a multitude of firearms, sold to him by the very Portuguese who later crushed him.
    America in 2100 could much more closely resemble America in 1900 than Lee suggests.

    All we need is a decent, committed portion of our own people willing to muster their courage.

    “For us an for our posterity” isn’t an empty turn of phrase.

    Thanks for your excellent comment.

    …an historic fee has been often been paid…Where were…

    I realized the same thing some time ago, and have used this argument when discussing the general subject with others, including recently: one of the things that most disgusts me about this whole ‘migration’ issue is the way these people are just given things — eg life in a first world country — that they and people like them have in no way earned.

    Read More
  69. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "MCPO USN"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Realist
    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.

    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.

    Nope. God’s country, from the start.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    And with that why don't you run out and make the world safe for:
    "DEMOCRACY"




    Democracy is the fastest growing world religion. Convert or die! Let's rock the world VOTE!
    Universal rights. Democracy a means to an end for the Left. Socialism to communism.
  70. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    This country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country.
     
    Nope. God's country, from the start.

    And with that why don’t you run out and make the world safe for:
    “DEMOCRACY”

    Democracy is the fastest growing world religion. Convert or die! Let’s rock the world VOTE!
    Universal rights. Democracy a means to an end for the Left. Socialism to communism.

    Read More
  71. @Jason Liu
    Read the volumes of literature the left has put out on "privilege".

    The idea is that a person from a privileged demographic has it better than a non-privileged one, even if he is super poor and disadvantaged, because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman.

    This may be true in some cases, but is generally unprovable. In either case, "I grew up poor!" is not a sufficient counterargument to leftist accusations of privilege. Those on the right need to develop a more substantial critique, namely that privilege is inherently a good thing and should be desired.

    Is there any group in America that is more ridiculed and despised by left, right and people of all colors than poor whites? The elites especially hate them, and the believers in white privilege view them as defects, since they couldn’t make anything out of their so-called privilege.

    In reality, poor whites are the ones the elite whites punish for their own privilege. How better to signal virtue than to grind other whites to dust and replace them with others? After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren’t going to do either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren’t going to do either.
     
    I have a theory

    most of the identity politics soldiers, (POC, Muslims, etc..) are very much aware of whose privileged 'white' arses run things in the Western world. But because of the ravages upon the universally reviled working class and poor whites, and how they're not only disenfranchised and affirmative action-ed out of jobs and opportunities, but are forced to see their daughters handed over to the teeming hoards of invaders, a al Rotherham and elsewhere, that these throngs of Muslims and POC and SJW are willing to tolerate all kinds of outrages upon their fellow Muslims for instance, in places like Palestine, so that they can enjoy the fruits of the poor white man's jobs and daughters and, such as they are- communities. As the poor whites are driven out of even those communities where they've languished, and forced to hand over everything.

    http://cms.kienthuc.net.vn/zoomh/500/uploaded/luyenminhbich/2015_12_25/lang-leu-bat-cua-nguoi-vo-gia-cu-trong-long-nuoc-my-hinh-3.jpg

    Even MLK was notoriously dismissive of the plight of the Palestinians, because he too had been to 'the mountain top', and understood the score, so to speak- that as long as the bankers and media-elites were running things, that his community was going to benefit from a zero-sum advantage over the working class whites. It was and is simply a question of Muslims and blacks and others being negotiated with over the destruction of their home countries or their congenital disadvantages by being handed handouts and the daughters of the poor of England or Germany and the daughters of working class and poor whites. The Nicole Simpsons of the world.

    The wealthy of England do not suffer their daughters being bought and sold on the block by Muslim gang rape gangs. No. It's the working class. And that is the trade off/pay off to the Muslims and blacks and others for ignoring that Palestinians and Iraqis and Somalis and so many other's nations are being destroyed wholesale. 'So what?' say the Muslims who have made it to these shores, look at the benefits we enjoy once we get to the "promised land!" Vote Democrat!

    Now it seems these working class whites have had quite enough of being the scape goats for the racial strife of the world. They've had enough of seeing their children be the ones to go to wars and come back in pieces, either physically or emotionally or spiritually (or all three), where they often snuff it to the disinterested amusement of the elites. (less tax dollars for veteran's care)

    All the statistics point to these people as the one demographic who're dying at unprecedented levels, and while this news is startling to those of us who're sympathetic to these people, it no doubt fills all the blacks and Muslims and elites with a smug satisfaction. 'Good, they think to themselves. Serves them right!' They're the ones Obama was mocking as he said they cling to their guns and religion because they're useless racists, and are slated for the trash heap of history' - or something to that effect. ;)

    Anyways, those are some of my ruminations over all of this, and identity politics in general and the startling rise of Donald Trump.
  72. @Epaminondas
    Jim Goad said all this in far fewer words...

    http://takimag.com/article/how_the_left_strangled_itself_with_identity_politics_jim_goad/print#comment-3036208463

    That article is extremely well-written

    http://takimag.com/article/how_the_left_strangled_itself_with_identity_politics_jim_goad/print#comment-3036208463

    the prose is nicely wry and the shiv expertly wielded

    Read More
  73. @LPG
    I will always respect the insight of Bill Moyers...the real stooges, in my opinion, include those blinded by the vigorous sociopathic cunning of Donald Trump and his surrogates. While they will stymie a war on white privilege, it will have nothing to do with genuine feelings that such a battle is not warranted... it will have EVERYTHING to do with making the rich richer, Trump in particular. I am an affluent, highly educated [white] individual who loathes much of the top 1 percent. No, it's not jealousy; it's that I have a conscience. We must level the playing ground, all the while being careful not to gratuitously dole out monies to those who truly did little to merit our generosity.

    LPG:

    Bill Moyers was/is Lyndon Johnson’s bagman!

    Read More
  74. @OilcanFloyd
    Is there any group in America that is more ridiculed and despised by left, right and people of all colors than poor whites? The elites especially hate them, and the believers in white privilege view them as defects, since they couldn't make anything out of their so-called privilege.

    In reality, poor whites are the ones the elite whites punish for their own privilege. How better to signal virtue than to grind other whites to dust and replace them with others? After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren't going to do either.

    After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren’t going to do either.

    I have a theory

    most of the identity politics soldiers, (POC, Muslims, etc..) are very much aware of whose privileged ‘white’ arses run things in the Western world. But because of the ravages upon the universally reviled working class and poor whites, and how they’re not only disenfranchised and affirmative action-ed out of jobs and opportunities, but are forced to see their daughters handed over to the teeming hoards of invaders, a al Rotherham and elsewhere, that these throngs of Muslims and POC and SJW are willing to tolerate all kinds of outrages upon their fellow Muslims for instance, in places like Palestine, so that they can enjoy the fruits of the poor white man’s jobs and daughters and, such as they are- communities. As the poor whites are driven out of even those communities where they’ve languished, and forced to hand over everything.

    http://cms.kienthuc.net.vn/zoomh/500/uploaded/luyenminhbich/2015_12_25/lang-leu-bat-cua-nguoi-vo-gia-cu-trong-long-nuoc-my-hinh-3.jpg

    Even MLK was notoriously dismissive of the plight of the Palestinians, because he too had been to ‘the mountain top’, and understood the score, so to speak- that as long as the bankers and media-elites were running things, that his community was going to benefit from a zero-sum advantage over the working class whites. It was and is simply a question of Muslims and blacks and others being negotiated with over the destruction of their home countries or their congenital disadvantages by being handed handouts and the daughters of the poor of England or Germany and the daughters of working class and poor whites. The Nicole Simpsons of the world.

    The wealthy of England do not suffer their daughters being bought and sold on the block by Muslim gang rape gangs. No. It’s the working class. And that is the trade off/pay off to the Muslims and blacks and others for ignoring that Palestinians and Iraqis and Somalis and so many other’s nations are being destroyed wholesale. ‘So what?’ say the Muslims who have made it to these shores, look at the benefits we enjoy once we get to the “promised land!” Vote Democrat!

    Now it seems these working class whites have had quite enough of being the scape goats for the racial strife of the world. They’ve had enough of seeing their children be the ones to go to wars and come back in pieces, either physically or emotionally or spiritually (or all three), where they often snuff it to the disinterested amusement of the elites. (less tax dollars for veteran’s care)

    All the statistics point to these people as the one demographic who’re dying at unprecedented levels, and while this news is startling to those of us who’re sympathetic to these people, it no doubt fills all the blacks and Muslims and elites with a smug satisfaction. ‘Good, they think to themselves. Serves them right!’ They’re the ones Obama was mocking as he said they cling to their guns and religion because they’re useless racists, and are slated for the trash heap of history’ – or something to that effect. ;)

    Anyways, those are some of my ruminations over all of this, and identity politics in general and the startling rise of Donald Trump.

    Read More
  75. @Jason Liu
    Are you talking to me, or the SJWs? This thread has an abundance of people who can't tell the difference between someone describing a group of people, and the group of people being described.

    This is what happens when the phrase "white privilege" triggers knee-jerk responses in white people who call themselves right-wing, but don't actually understand ideological inequality.

    We are not talking between nations. White Ukrainians are the most privileged race in Ukraine. If they weren't, Ukraine would be a morally illegitimate state. Yours and other defensive responses stem from a fear of inequality, otherwise you would embrace privilege as a positive thing.

    I've been arguing for racial separatism and ethno-inequality for all my adult life. Good of you to notice.

    OK – I’ll bite. If you agree with racial separation what are you doing in the west? Just asking.

    Read More
  76. “White privilege” is a fantasy invoked by cunts like Clinton and Obama to win votes of criminally inclined and mostly dumb colored people such as Black Lives Matter thugs and lunatic Jihadi Middle-Eastern immigrants who want to impose a reign of terror, rape and pillage over America’s European majority.

    God knows why any sensible Euro-America person would treat claims about white privilege with anything but the absolute contempt that such racism deserves. Talking about it only gives apparent substance to bullshit. White folks should keep their firearms handy and go on demanding jail time for traitor Hillary.

    Read More
  77. Utter drivel…the war on whites has been going on for at least 30 years, with extremely negative consequences for the middle classes and the economy , and Trump is the result….As pension funds start to collapse, it will be class warfare that seizes the stage.

    Read More
  78. Is America Ready for a War on White Privilege?

    That is so yesterday – those people in that picture are yesterday (Obama and Clintons) – the Judaic led media who promote race division are yesterday.

    Trump is too lively to let the anti-white forces build up steam with the American people.

    He will always keep them off guard – he knows how to put them in a tumult over nothing. Then they look stupid.

    Already the snowflakes have melted – they are already yesterday.

    The Jew led elite left has lost power over the American agenda.

    Peace — Art

    p.s. Black men need to take their place as fathers – only that can better lives for blacks.

    p.s. The Judaic owned MSM is the big loser.

    Read More
  79. @Fidelios Automata
    I have been white all my life, and have yet to experience so-called white privilege. How anybody can swallow such PC nonsense is beyond me.

    I recall a Human Resources person tell me in an interview that he wished I was black, as he could hire me on the spot with my qualifications. But sorry, no job. The hired candidate had to be black. Is that white privilege?

    Read More
  80. @Connecticut Famer
    "The big story over the next thirty five years is the inexorable decline of the white vote from majority to plurality"

    Indeed--and at the current rate possibly even sooner. By the next century whites probably won't even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority. Most of us won't be around to see it, so we can only speculate at how much in-fighting there will be among the non-whites who will be fill the majoritarian vacuum and which group will attain plurality status within that majority. Given their current birthrate, however, it will most assuredly NOT be the blacks. And there is no small irony in that possibility.

    In any event,bet the farm that in the long, long run although the players will have changed the narrative will remain the same, the tired old arguments dressed up in new form. "Plus ca change " etc.

    By the next century whites probably won’t even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority.

    This is actually not likely. The Hispanic birth rate is slowing down and approaching that of whites.

    http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2015/11/27/birth-rates-among-latinas-at-all-time-low-as-their-prosperity-continues-to-grow/

    Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans).

    There is little doubt that whites will become a plurality because it will take a generation for Hispanics to achieve more-or-less white fertility rates; already whites are a very slim minority of new births. I’d guess the long-term future will probably have whites (including those who might have a Mexican or Puerto Rican grandparent) at around 45%, vs. 15% black, 10% Asian and 30% Hispanic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans)."

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America. None of the elites who run Washington plan to pass an Immigratiom Act Of 1924 type law on Hispanics.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703630304575271543285254312

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.

    That's like expecting most Whites in Boise, Fargo, and Portland to marry Hispanics.

    , @RadicalCenter
    I'm guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States -- CA and TX -- in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you're overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I'm both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

  81. @AP
    Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can't be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth.

    (this doesn't mean that privilege due to being the historical majority, and to being productive, is unnatural or wrong)

    “Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can’t be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth.”

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.

    I have never heard of female escorts charging her White male clients less than their Black male clients.

    I have never heard of banks lending thousands or millions of dollars to White people with bad credit.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.
     
    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn't indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence. This can be repeated over and over again further and further down - some kid indifferent to education but raised in a white middle class environment will probably go to college and end up with a middle class job; a similarly unmotivated poor black kid in a poor black neighborhood may not finish high school and will either work low wage jobs or live very modestly off government assistance.

    Leftists will say that privilege is a reflection of current ongoing racism, and they are for the most part wrong. It seems to rather reflect dysfunctional culture among particular subcultures, alongside lower accumulated capital, with past historical injustice explaining in large part how this situation came to be. The Affirmative Action examples you describe are merely attempts to compensate for the past injustice.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.
     
    I'm not a Liberal but I'm one of those people who don't watch enough TV to know your reference. Obviously there are many white people whose lives are worse than those of many black people. But, as on the intelligence bell curve, despite some overlap, overall blacks tend to be doing poorly relative to whites.
  82. @Preston Brooks
    The reality is the opposite; whites have much less "privilege" than they are entitled too.

    This is because for every perceived "privilege," an historic fee has been often been paid, sometimes in gold, other times in sweat, and even more expensively, in blood. It's those who have put the most into shaping the present who should enjoy the benefits. "For us an for our posterity" isn't an empty turn of phrase.

    How much historic cultural capital did the ancestors of Syrian refugees produce by battling frostbite at Valley Forge? Where were the Somalis in 1812, when the capital was ravaged and scattered patriots struggled to link up and muster some kind of defense? Where were the ancestors of the Guatemalan illegals at Omaha Beach? I have an ancestor at all three, and it was those men who paid the cost for me to be the boss. If others want such "privilege," they must do the work. They can start by internalizing the traditional values and virtues as laid down by the founders. Until they do this they are always going to be nothing more than the kid sleeping over. They will never be part of the family.

    You cannot truly be a citizen of a Republic if military service is completely rejected a priori. You can't be an "American worker" if you don't work hard, set down roots, and plan to become "of the land" on a long-term basis. In my family's instance, we even have Indian roots. Many do.

    This is the advantage we have, and what the left absolutely cannot stand; America is OURS in a way that will never be theirs. It's the way that Korea belongs to the Koreans, Japan to the Japanese, and England to the English. Most peoples of the world migrated at some point. However if long-standing roots are present, a people can be said to be irrevocably and legitimately "of"
    a place.

    WWII made us wealthy beyond comprehension. Those who wish to enjoy that prosperity should defer to the posterity of those who secured it.

    Regarding Lee, I thought the article was insightful, but he is gravely mistaken about the future:

    Anglo man simply cannot be enslaved. He is genetically unruly. It is far more likely that after "old whites" die that "young whites" reforge the nation of their ancestors, than it woukd be for them to accept slavery under the less capable and illegitimate. Especially seeing as how the white population in virtually every Western country is undergoing a massive evolutionary bottleneck. Yes whites will be less in 2050, but they will be our children and they will absolutely pop the hell off if they are threatened. The cucked whites are much less fecund. As for the Minorities, they have always enjoyed the benefit of numbers on a global scale- it doesn't take many committed whites to bring them to heel. The Portuguese wrecked the massive Kingdom of the Kongo with just a handful of soldiers, despite the Kongolese king wielding a massive army with a multitude of firearms, sold to him by the very Portuguese who later crushed him.
    America in 2100 could much more closely resemble America in 1900 than Lee suggests.

    All we need is a decent, committed portion of our own people willing to muster their courage.

    Hear, hear!

    Read More
  83. @AP

    By the next century whites probably won’t even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority.
     
    This is actually not likely. The Hispanic birth rate is slowing down and approaching that of whites.

    http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2015/11/27/birth-rates-among-latinas-at-all-time-low-as-their-prosperity-continues-to-grow/

    Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans).

    There is little doubt that whites will become a plurality because it will take a generation for Hispanics to achieve more-or-less white fertility rates; already whites are a very slim minority of new births. I'd guess the long-term future will probably have whites (including those who might have a Mexican or Puerto Rican grandparent) at around 45%, vs. 15% black, 10% Asian and 30% Hispanic.

    “Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans).”

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America. None of the elites who run Washington plan to pass an Immigratiom Act Of 1924 type law on Hispanics.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703630304575271543285254312

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.

    That’s like expecting most Whites in Boise, Fargo, and Portland to marry Hispanics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America.
     
    Immigration is slowing down and will probably slow down further during this presidency.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
     
    I couldn't access you link. But here:

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    " For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).

    ... the intermarriage rate has declined slightly for native-born Hispanics (from 39% to 36%) during the same period, but increased slightly for foreign-born Hispanics (from 12% to 14%). "

    So even if intermarriage rates decline from the current 1 if n 4 to 1 in 5, that is still rather substantial.

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.
     
    I never claimed "most Hispanics." I stated, " a significant % of Hispanics." The current 25% is a significant percentage. If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.
  84. @Jason Liu
    Read the volumes of literature the left has put out on "privilege".

    The idea is that a person from a privileged demographic has it better than a non-privileged one, even if he is super poor and disadvantaged, because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman.

    This may be true in some cases, but is generally unprovable. In either case, "I grew up poor!" is not a sufficient counterargument to leftist accusations of privilege. Those on the right need to develop a more substantial critique, namely that privilege is inherently a good thing and should be desired.

    “because he is more favored by society, sympathized with, aided, and so on compared to a minority or woman”

    you have got to be fucking kidding me…….I, due to my skin shade, am labeled racist before i even open my mouth……some fucking privilege. And i don’t blame the morons that think that way, most are spoon feed from the cradle the “fact” that humans with a white penis are evil and racist.

    Even YOU just did by claiming that due to my white penis i have it “better” even though I’m on the street and living in cardboard box…….how fucking evil is that?

    and just to be clear, when we talk white privilege we’re talking white men only……the evil racists…..right?

    Read More
  85. @Jefferson
    "Asian success merely proves the white privilege is not so strong that it can’t be overcome by hardworking, intelligent people. It does not prove that white privilege is a myth."

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.

    I have never heard of female escorts charging her White male clients less than their Black male clients.

    I have never heard of banks lending thousands or millions of dollars to White people with bad credit.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.

    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn’t indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence. This can be repeated over and over again further and further down – some kid indifferent to education but raised in a white middle class environment will probably go to college and end up with a middle class job; a similarly unmotivated poor black kid in a poor black neighborhood may not finish high school and will either work low wage jobs or live very modestly off government assistance.

    Leftists will say that privilege is a reflection of current ongoing racism, and they are for the most part wrong. It seems to rather reflect dysfunctional culture among particular subcultures, alongside lower accumulated capital, with past historical injustice explaining in large part how this situation came to be. The Affirmative Action examples you describe are merely attempts to compensate for the past injustice.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.

    I’m not a Liberal but I’m one of those people who don’t watch enough TV to know your reference. Obviously there are many white people whose lives are worse than those of many black people. But, as on the intelligence bell curve, despite some overlap, overall blacks tend to be doing poorly relative to whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn’t indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence.
     
    George W. Bush is smarter than you
  86. Guess what?? White privilege caused Pearl Harbor! I guess. Or at least “racism,” as defined by the author of this incredibly narrow article in National Geographic.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/countdown-pearl-harbor-attack-twomey-anniversary/

    For those 0f us old enough to remember our parents’ first hand discussions of WW2, you’d think the NG author was referring to the sense of extreme racial superiority that the Japs had before, during and after the war. But there’s no mention of that. I guess because they weren’t capable of racism…only whites were/are/will be forever.

    Japanese racial supremacy is something that is routinely and intentionally overlooked among modern “historians.” As are the Japanese war crimes.

    http://listverse.com/2014/05/06/10-japanese-atrocities-from-world-war-ii/

    But there’s no Jap privilege in Japan.

    Read More
  87. @Jefferson
    "Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans)."

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America. None of the elites who run Washington plan to pass an Immigratiom Act Of 1924 type law on Hispanics.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703630304575271543285254312

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.

    That's like expecting most Whites in Boise, Fargo, and Portland to marry Hispanics.

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America.

    Immigration is slowing down and will probably slow down further during this presidency.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.

    I couldn’t access you link. But here:

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).

    … the intermarriage rate has declined slightly for native-born Hispanics (from 39% to 36%) during the same period, but increased slightly for foreign-born Hispanics (from 12% to 14%). ”

    So even if intermarriage rates decline from the current 1 if n 4 to 1 in 5, that is still rather substantial.

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.

    I never claimed “most Hispanics.” I stated, ” a significant % of Hispanics.” The current 25% is a significant percentage. If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.
     
    Yeah, but some of that loss does revert, if not in the same generation, then in the next. Sometimes they angrily over-revert.

    Cf. "moderate Muslims". Those wonderful, and shocked, parents of jihadists.
    , @Jefferson
    "Immigration is slowing down"

    No it's not. I will believe Hispanic immigration is slowing down when it reaches European levels of immigration. We barely get European immigration into America anymore.

    "1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%)."

    19%, 12%, and 11% is not 1 in 4 marrying Whites.

    Marrying Non Hispanics does not automatically mean marrying White. Plenty of Hispanics marry African Americans as well, especially among Puerto Ricans.

    In New York City and Orlando I see more Puerto Ricans with African Americans than I see Puerto Ricans with Whites.

    , @RadicalCenter
    You're assuming that the Mexican spouse -- or should I say "partner" -- will assimilate to the traditional American culture, language, and way of life.

    I wouldn't be so sure of that. The non-Mexican partner may well assimilate more to the Mexican, or at least Mexamerican hybrid culture, especially for couples who live in majority-Mexican towns/cities.

    To the extent that the latter is true, Mexican-white intermarriage / procreation may hasten, rather than slow, our country's slide into some sort of disgusting hybrid Mexicanized culture.

  88. @WorkingClass
    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It's not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them.

    The real working “class” believes the number of Mexicans allowed to immigrate to this country should be zero. The Mexican immigrant working class believes the number of Mexicans allowed to immigrate to this country should be large enough to include themselves. Try and build a “class” out of that.

    The white working class does not want to live next door to the black working class, not because some intellectuals paid by plutocrats hoodwinked them, but because there are real consequences to living next door to them– let alone next to the black non-working class!

    The black working class probably would prefer to avoid the white working class as well, but they’re the only whites they can afford to live near, and any whites at all are a step up for them, quality-of-lifewise.

    It’s not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    “It’s not just liberals who buy the idea” of heliocentrism, or of natural selection. “Many of the commenters here agree with it.”

    Reality, and experience thereof, might have a part to play in this. Give this “working class” you pretend to speak for credit for knowing a thing or two. Otherwise, you’re just Hillary, with a dash of Bernie for spice.

    Read More
  89. @AP

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America.
     
    Immigration is slowing down and will probably slow down further during this presidency.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
     
    I couldn't access you link. But here:

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    " For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).

    ... the intermarriage rate has declined slightly for native-born Hispanics (from 39% to 36%) during the same period, but increased slightly for foreign-born Hispanics (from 12% to 14%). "

    So even if intermarriage rates decline from the current 1 if n 4 to 1 in 5, that is still rather substantial.

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.
     
    I never claimed "most Hispanics." I stated, " a significant % of Hispanics." The current 25% is a significant percentage. If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.

    If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.

    Yeah, but some of that loss does revert, if not in the same generation, then in the next. Sometimes they angrily over-revert.

    Cf. “moderate Muslims”. Those wonderful, and shocked, parents of jihadists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    I can see some educated, liberal 1/4 Mexican kid learning Spanish and disavowing his non-Mexican heritage, but I suspect this sort of thing would be rare.
  90. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @CK
    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
    The prosecution team was sure a jury of women would vote
    guilty.
    The defence team agreed on a jury of women ( black )
    because they knew that race trumps gender in the
    victimization hierarchy.
    Had Simpson been another rich white LosAngeleno
    that same jury would have fried his ass.

    I wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?"

    What if George Lucas had murdered his Black wife? Would a jury of White liberal women in Marin County, California where he resides have acquitted him?
    , @CK
    My suspicion is that with race no longer a factor that jury would have voted to convict on the evidence.
    My prior is that with race no longer a factor, Cochran and team would have tried for a change of venue or worked harder for a jury of white males or taken a negotiated deal.
  91. @AP

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America.
     
    Immigration is slowing down and will probably slow down further during this presidency.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
     
    I couldn't access you link. But here:

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    " For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).

    ... the intermarriage rate has declined slightly for native-born Hispanics (from 39% to 36%) during the same period, but increased slightly for foreign-born Hispanics (from 12% to 14%). "

    So even if intermarriage rates decline from the current 1 if n 4 to 1 in 5, that is still rather substantial.

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.
     
    I never claimed "most Hispanics." I stated, " a significant % of Hispanics." The current 25% is a significant percentage. If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.

    “Immigration is slowing down”

    No it’s not. I will believe Hispanic immigration is slowing down when it reaches European levels of immigration. We barely get European immigration into America anymore.

    “1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).”

    19%, 12%, and 11% is not 1 in 4 marrying Whites.

    Marrying Non Hispanics does not automatically mean marrying White. Plenty of Hispanics marry African Americans as well, especially among Puerto Ricans.

    In New York City and Orlando I see more Puerto Ricans with African Americans than I see Puerto Ricans with Whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    “1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).”

    19%, 12%, and 11% is not 1 in 4 marrying Whites
     
    Read more carefully. The bottom figures are the total % of marriages in the state that are white-Hispanic marriages. So about 1 in 5 marriages in NM are between whites and Hispanics. It's a little over 1 in 10 in AZ and NV.

    Overall, in the USA, about 25% of Hispanics marry outside their race.

    Marrying Non Hispanics does not automatically mean marrying White. Plenty of Hispanics marry African Americans as well, especially among Puerto Ricans
     
    Sure, but generally speaking non-blacks tend not to marry blacks. The Pew study I linked to showed that there were several times more White/Hispanic couples than there were Black/Hispanic couples:

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/sdt-2012-rise-of-intermarriage-05.png

    It has white/Hispanic at 43.3% of marriages and "other" at 30.4%. This survey doesn't tell us specifically what % of others are black/Hispanic marriages but a similar survey from 2008 provides more detail, indicates that about half the "other" is a nixed-race marriage between two non-white people:

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/legacy/755-3.gif

    41% of interracial marriage is between whites and Hispanics, 16% between two non-whites. Some of those must be between Asians and Blacks or Asians and Hispanics or Native Americans and non-whites, so let's say about 12% between Hispanics and Blacks.

    Therefore, about 3 times more Hispanics marry whites than marry blacks.
  92. @anonymous
    Basically, they used to argue against racism, but after a while it became apparent that non-whites are usually far more racist than whites, so they had to get specific -- as the target was whites.

    They invented this 'privilege' pucky so it could be attached specifically to whites.

    Of course whites *are* privileged, broadly speaking, but that isn't something that can be changed much, unless there are active measures put in place to hold whites down.

    Since whites built America for the most part, and made up 90% of the population till recently -- they ARE the norm. I guess some people feel they no longer should be since other groups started arriving en mass -- not that whites wanted them to come all that much. But the indians were here first…. bla bla bla… so what can you do?

    There is big big trouble on the horizon. Hopefully I can finish my days in peace before it all goes pop. Thankfully no children.

    “Thankfully no children.” Then you are part of the problem.

    Thanks for failing to do the hard work to leave people behind, when you’re gone, who could have voted, and worked, and marched, and if necessary fought beside our children.

    Read More
  93. @Anon
    I wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?

    “wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?”

    What if George Lucas had murdered his Black wife? Would a jury of White liberal women in Marin County, California where he resides have acquitted him?

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    His defense attorneys would not have asked for a change of venue to Oakland. But "if the movie is shit you must convict" might have worked for the prosecution.
    Jar
    Jar
    B
    links
    , @Hibernian
    Mr. and Mrs. Lucas were involved in a big controversy in Chicago over a museum they wanted to build on the lakefront. Lakefront preservationists objected and Mr. and Mrs. Lucas wouldn't compromise so they took their ball and bat and went home to the Bay area.
  94. Hasn’t there been a war on “white privilege” for decades? IMO its disconnect from reality has just become more and more obvious as the fortunes of the white working class, designated by the elites as those who would pay the costs of fighting “white privilege,” have declined. 2016 was a perfect storm of prolonged economic stagnation, an increasingly noisy identity politics establishment promoting patently false narratives, opportunistic presidential candidates latching onto those narratives, and an in-your-face confrontation of PC manners and narratives from the eventual winner. IMO Trump wasn’t so much about promoting white identitarianism as he was a big middle finger towards racial and sexual identitarianism. Whatever the next years hold, the range of acceptable discussion is no longer dictated by identitarian sensibilities (winning changes a lot of things) and the frantic and shrill campaign to put the genie of changing political culture back in the bottle will inevitably fail.

    Sanders, like Clinton, latched onto identity politics and consequently diluted his economic message. Voters concerned with class issues were presented with two flawed choices; Sanders, who had a pro-working class economic platform but had latched onto anti-working class identity politics, and Trump offering the same old trickle-down, maybe if the rich get richer more crumbs will fall off the table nonsense but confronting the political culture that puts white male workers last. Sanders’ identitarian pandering was futile. Identitarian voting blocs went for the candidate who they felt had the power to grant them a shortcut to the goodies, and anti-identitarian voters who might have been receptive to Sanders’ economic message were turned off. Sanders focused on economics and class in a general election would have been formidable against Trump; the Sanders who volunteered to take on SJW baggage during the primaries would probably have lost.

    Read More
  95. @Jefferson
    "Immigration is slowing down"

    No it's not. I will believe Hispanic immigration is slowing down when it reaches European levels of immigration. We barely get European immigration into America anymore.

    "1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%)."

    19%, 12%, and 11% is not 1 in 4 marrying Whites.

    Marrying Non Hispanics does not automatically mean marrying White. Plenty of Hispanics marry African Americans as well, especially among Puerto Ricans.

    In New York City and Orlando I see more Puerto Ricans with African Americans than I see Puerto Ricans with Whites.

    “1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    ” For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).”

    19%, 12%, and 11% is not 1 in 4 marrying Whites

    Read more carefully. The bottom figures are the total % of marriages in the state that are white-Hispanic marriages. So about 1 in 5 marriages in NM are between whites and Hispanics. It’s a little over 1 in 10 in AZ and NV.

    Overall, in the USA, about 25% of Hispanics marry outside their race.

    Marrying Non Hispanics does not automatically mean marrying White. Plenty of Hispanics marry African Americans as well, especially among Puerto Ricans

    Sure, but generally speaking non-blacks tend not to marry blacks. The Pew study I linked to showed that there were several times more White/Hispanic couples than there were Black/Hispanic couples:

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/sdt-2012-rise-of-intermarriage-05.png

    It has white/Hispanic at 43.3% of marriages and “other” at 30.4%. This survey doesn’t tell us specifically what % of others are black/Hispanic marriages but a similar survey from 2008 provides more detail, indicates that about half the “other” is a nixed-race marriage between two non-white people:

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/legacy/755-3.gif

    41% of interracial marriage is between whites and Hispanics, 16% between two non-whites. Some of those must be between Asians and Blacks or Asians and Hispanics or Native Americans and non-whites, so let’s say about 12% between Hispanics and Blacks.

    Therefore, about 3 times more Hispanics marry whites than marry blacks.

    Read More
  96. @Reg Cæsar

    If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.
     
    Yeah, but some of that loss does revert, if not in the same generation, then in the next. Sometimes they angrily over-revert.

    Cf. "moderate Muslims". Those wonderful, and shocked, parents of jihadists.

    I can see some educated, liberal 1/4 Mexican kid learning Spanish and disavowing his non-Mexican heritage, but I suspect this sort of thing would be rare.

    Read More
  97. @Anon
    I wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?

    My suspicion is that with race no longer a factor that jury would have voted to convict on the evidence.
    My prior is that with race no longer a factor, Cochran and team would have tried for a change of venue or worked harder for a jury of white males or taken a negotiated deal.

    Read More
  98. @Jefferson
    "wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?"

    What if George Lucas had murdered his Black wife? Would a jury of White liberal women in Marin County, California where he resides have acquitted him?

    His defense attorneys would not have asked for a change of venue to Oakland. But “if the movie is shit you must convict” might have worked for the prosecution.
    Jar
    Jar
    B
    links

    Read More
  99. @Preston Brooks
    The reality is the opposite; whites have much less "privilege" than they are entitled too.

    This is because for every perceived "privilege," an historic fee has been often been paid, sometimes in gold, other times in sweat, and even more expensively, in blood. It's those who have put the most into shaping the present who should enjoy the benefits. "For us an for our posterity" isn't an empty turn of phrase.

    How much historic cultural capital did the ancestors of Syrian refugees produce by battling frostbite at Valley Forge? Where were the Somalis in 1812, when the capital was ravaged and scattered patriots struggled to link up and muster some kind of defense? Where were the ancestors of the Guatemalan illegals at Omaha Beach? I have an ancestor at all three, and it was those men who paid the cost for me to be the boss. If others want such "privilege," they must do the work. They can start by internalizing the traditional values and virtues as laid down by the founders. Until they do this they are always going to be nothing more than the kid sleeping over. They will never be part of the family.

    You cannot truly be a citizen of a Republic if military service is completely rejected a priori. You can't be an "American worker" if you don't work hard, set down roots, and plan to become "of the land" on a long-term basis. In my family's instance, we even have Indian roots. Many do.

    This is the advantage we have, and what the left absolutely cannot stand; America is OURS in a way that will never be theirs. It's the way that Korea belongs to the Koreans, Japan to the Japanese, and England to the English. Most peoples of the world migrated at some point. However if long-standing roots are present, a people can be said to be irrevocably and legitimately "of"
    a place.

    WWII made us wealthy beyond comprehension. Those who wish to enjoy that prosperity should defer to the posterity of those who secured it.

    Regarding Lee, I thought the article was insightful, but he is gravely mistaken about the future:

    Anglo man simply cannot be enslaved. He is genetically unruly. It is far more likely that after "old whites" die that "young whites" reforge the nation of their ancestors, than it woukd be for them to accept slavery under the less capable and illegitimate. Especially seeing as how the white population in virtually every Western country is undergoing a massive evolutionary bottleneck. Yes whites will be less in 2050, but they will be our children and they will absolutely pop the hell off if they are threatened. The cucked whites are much less fecund. As for the Minorities, they have always enjoyed the benefit of numbers on a global scale- it doesn't take many committed whites to bring them to heel. The Portuguese wrecked the massive Kingdom of the Kongo with just a handful of soldiers, despite the Kongolese king wielding a massive army with a multitude of firearms, sold to him by the very Portuguese who later crushed him.
    America in 2100 could much more closely resemble America in 1900 than Lee suggests.

    All we need is a decent, committed portion of our own people willing to muster their courage.

    I hope you’re right. You know how to reason, how to write, and how to inspire, that’s for sure.

    I fear, though, that what white Americans and our allies — including millions of half-white, half-Asian Americans like our children — will win is a territorially, economically, and therefore militarily diminished USA. Mexicans and their descendants here will be very difficult to dislodge from much of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, inter alia, even with full-scale civil war (a terrible prospect for good people of all backgrounds). But we must try to regain and restore our country.

    Read More
  100. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    By war on ‘white privilege’, how will it play out? First go after whites in the Democratic Party and then move onto those in the GOP?

    But the Democratic Party would be what without white funding?

    Btw, why is Keith Ellison being grilled about his past ties to the Nation of Islam, but no one in the US government or media ever addresses issues like this?

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/5-of-ovadia-yosefs-most-controversial-quotations/

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/jerusalem-closes-down-for-rabbi-ovadia-yosefs-funeral/

    Largest funeral in Israel for a rabbi who said gentiles exist only to serve Jews and entertained the idea of wiping out Arabs.

    If so many Israelis revere a man with such views, why is the US showering the Jewish State with billions and billions?

    But then, what was not okay for South Africa is perfectly okay for Israel.

    Double standards all around.

    Read More
  101. @Connecticut Famer
    "The big story over the next thirty five years is the inexorable decline of the white vote from majority to plurality"

    Indeed--and at the current rate possibly even sooner. By the next century whites probably won't even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority. Most of us won't be around to see it, so we can only speculate at how much in-fighting there will be among the non-whites who will be fill the majoritarian vacuum and which group will attain plurality status within that majority. Given their current birthrate, however, it will most assuredly NOT be the blacks. And there is no small irony in that possibility.

    In any event,bet the farm that in the long, long run although the players will have changed the narrative will remain the same, the tired old arguments dressed up in new form. "Plus ca change " etc.

    Not much to speculate about: it is the Mexicans who will be the largest racial group, i.e., a plurality, and they’ll almost certainly be the solid majority in our two most populous States, California and Texas. Not too far in the future, either.

    Read More
  102. @AP

    By the next century whites probably won’t even be a plurality. A significant minority, yes, but, still, a minority.
     
    This is actually not likely. The Hispanic birth rate is slowing down and approaching that of whites.

    http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2015/11/27/birth-rates-among-latinas-at-all-time-low-as-their-prosperity-continues-to-grow/

    Moreover, a significant % of Hispanics will intermarry with and assimilate into white society (assuming they are not white already, as are many Cubans).

    There is little doubt that whites will become a plurality because it will take a generation for Hispanics to achieve more-or-less white fertility rates; already whites are a very slim minority of new births. I'd guess the long-term future will probably have whites (including those who might have a Mexican or Puerto Rican grandparent) at around 45%, vs. 15% black, 10% Asian and 30% Hispanic.

    I’m guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States — CA and TX — in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you’re overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I’m both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    Perhaps someone should explain to Señor Trump and the Trumpistas that PRs are not immigrants--in United Statesian territory at least.
    , @Seth Largo
    You're confusing mestizos with indios. Hint: if they don't speak Spanish, they aint mestizos.
    , @AP
    "Also think you’re overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites.

    The data say about 26% of all Hispanics marry outside their race (see one of my other posts here), and that about 2/3 of such marriages involve Hispanics marrying whites.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.
     
    Sorry, you are mistaken.

    http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/19/no-hispanic-surge-on-the-horizon/

    "A recent CDC survey reports that Hispanic total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen for an unprecedented eighth straight year, while the percentage of children born to Hispanic parents has fallen for seven years in a row.

    The national fertility rate is 1.86 children per woman, well below the 2.1 replacement level; it varies among racial groups with Asian and American Indian women on the low end and black and Hispanic women on the high end. Hispanics’ total TFR stood at 2.15 in 2013, dropping from 2.35 in 2010. (These numbers mirror similar trends overseas.) While Hispanics overall still have a TFR above replacement level, the same isn’t true for native-born Hispanic Americans."

    it is the Mexicans who will be the largest racial group, i.e., a plurality, and they’ll almost certainly be the solid majority in our two most populous States, California and Texas. Not too far in the future, either.
     
    Doubtful. Currently non-Hispanic whites are about 62% of the population, Hispanics 16%. The latter were projected, in 2008, to become 30% by 2050. At that time, non-Hispanic whites were projected to be 46.6%, blacks 14.4% and Asians 7.7%. Since then immigration has slowed and Hispanic projections are a little lower. Under Trump's probable policies this may be even lower still. If it happens, it will be sometime around the turn of the 22nd century.
    , @Hibernian
    "and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one."

    I don't doubt it's true of CA and TX, but there's a very significant Puerto Rican community in Chicago.
  103. @Rurik

    After all, somebody has to sacrifice for affirmative action and put up with minority rage and crime. Elite whites aren’t going to do either.
     
    I have a theory

    most of the identity politics soldiers, (POC, Muslims, etc..) are very much aware of whose privileged 'white' arses run things in the Western world. But because of the ravages upon the universally reviled working class and poor whites, and how they're not only disenfranchised and affirmative action-ed out of jobs and opportunities, but are forced to see their daughters handed over to the teeming hoards of invaders, a al Rotherham and elsewhere, that these throngs of Muslims and POC and SJW are willing to tolerate all kinds of outrages upon their fellow Muslims for instance, in places like Palestine, so that they can enjoy the fruits of the poor white man's jobs and daughters and, such as they are- communities. As the poor whites are driven out of even those communities where they've languished, and forced to hand over everything.

    http://cms.kienthuc.net.vn/zoomh/500/uploaded/luyenminhbich/2015_12_25/lang-leu-bat-cua-nguoi-vo-gia-cu-trong-long-nuoc-my-hinh-3.jpg

    Even MLK was notoriously dismissive of the plight of the Palestinians, because he too had been to 'the mountain top', and understood the score, so to speak- that as long as the bankers and media-elites were running things, that his community was going to benefit from a zero-sum advantage over the working class whites. It was and is simply a question of Muslims and blacks and others being negotiated with over the destruction of their home countries or their congenital disadvantages by being handed handouts and the daughters of the poor of England or Germany and the daughters of working class and poor whites. The Nicole Simpsons of the world.

    The wealthy of England do not suffer their daughters being bought and sold on the block by Muslim gang rape gangs. No. It's the working class. And that is the trade off/pay off to the Muslims and blacks and others for ignoring that Palestinians and Iraqis and Somalis and so many other's nations are being destroyed wholesale. 'So what?' say the Muslims who have made it to these shores, look at the benefits we enjoy once we get to the "promised land!" Vote Democrat!

    Now it seems these working class whites have had quite enough of being the scape goats for the racial strife of the world. They've had enough of seeing their children be the ones to go to wars and come back in pieces, either physically or emotionally or spiritually (or all three), where they often snuff it to the disinterested amusement of the elites. (less tax dollars for veteran's care)

    All the statistics point to these people as the one demographic who're dying at unprecedented levels, and while this news is startling to those of us who're sympathetic to these people, it no doubt fills all the blacks and Muslims and elites with a smug satisfaction. 'Good, they think to themselves. Serves them right!' They're the ones Obama was mocking as he said they cling to their guns and religion because they're useless racists, and are slated for the trash heap of history' - or something to that effect. ;)

    Anyways, those are some of my ruminations over all of this, and identity politics in general and the startling rise of Donald Trump.

    Outstanding analysis and ruminations, as usual.

    Read More
  104. @AP

    The percentage of Hispanics who assimilate into White society will always be an extremely limited minority because there will forever be unlimited immigration from Latin America.
     
    Immigration is slowing down and will probably slow down further during this presidency.

    Also Hispanic interracial marriage rate with Whites is decreasing because Hispanics have plenty of other Hispanic partners to choose from.
     
    I couldn't access you link. But here:

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

    1 in 4 Hispanics marry outside their race. From the article:

    " For marriages between whites and Hispanics, states with the highest prevalence rates are New Mexico (19%), Arizona (12%) and Nevada (11%).

    ... the intermarriage rate has declined slightly for native-born Hispanics (from 39% to 36%) during the same period, but increased slightly for foreign-born Hispanics (from 12% to 14%). "

    So even if intermarriage rates decline from the current 1 if n 4 to 1 in 5, that is still rather substantial.

    Why should most Hispanics in Miami, Los Angeles , and El Paso for example marry a White person when Hispanics are the majority in these cities.
     
    I never claimed "most Hispanics." I stated, " a significant % of Hispanics." The current 25% is a significant percentage. If it goes down to 20% or 15% that is still a significant percentage lost to assimilation.

    You’re assuming that the Mexican spouse — or should I say “partner” — will assimilate to the traditional American culture, language, and way of life.

    I wouldn’t be so sure of that. The non-Mexican partner may well assimilate more to the Mexican, or at least Mexamerican hybrid culture, especially for couples who live in majority-Mexican towns/cities.

    To the extent that the latter is true, Mexican-white intermarriage / procreation may hasten, rather than slow, our country’s slide into some sort of disgusting hybrid Mexicanized culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    You’re assuming that the Mexican spouse — or should I say “partner” — will assimilate to the traditional American culture, language, and way of life
     
    Since Mexicans themselves tend to lose the Spanish language (only 17% of Mexicans whose grandparents were born in Mexico but parents were born in the USA can speak fluent Spanish) it is likely that this process will be even more accelerated within mixed marriages.

    I only know two people who are products of Hispanic-White marriages. Neither one speaks conversational Spanish; vocabulary is limited to words such as "grandma." One of them grew up in suburban LA. Have you had different experiences?

    One of the people I know married a blonde, blue-eyed American woman and their 1/4 Mexican kids are simply white looking. They might check off Hispanic when applying to schools if it helps them, but functionally they are basically just white Americans.

    The actress who played an assistant D.A. on Law and Order, Alana de la Garza, is half Mexican and half Irish-American. Her husband is white - here she is with their 1/4 Mexican kids:

    http://i.skyrock.net/6930/31526930/pics/3189398477_1_4_Fkhgm57J.jpg
  105. @jack shindo
    But this is the problem, to wit as it were [quote]this country was founded by whites from northwest Europe. From the start it was meant to be a white country."[/quote]
    1. The white Europeans found indigenous people living here. When you go someplace and no one is there, it is only then that one may say that 'we discovered that".
    2. Taking land from someone does not mean you originally owned it. That is theft. Then you put the owners on reservations, deny them compensations and when they complain, you ask them for title of said land. Yes, the theft of the land was wonderful but nothing more. Taking pride in that theft is another matter.
    3. Based on the deceit, manipualtion ,etc then from the beginning, it was meant to be the white man's land. Absolutely correct and that cannot be denied.
    Amen

    It is true to say that European discovered America,despite the fact that the Red Indians were there before Europeans. Just because humans breathed oxygen before Priestley isolated it and Lavoisier learnt what it does this doesn’t mean that these scientists did not discover oxygen. The man that found dinosaur fossils thought they were animals that died in Noah’s flood, it was Richard Owen that discovered dinosaurs, because he realised what they were, that is to say, their place in the scheme of nature. Similarly, the Europeans that landed in America discovered America since they were able to place America in the context of a (correct) theory about the Earth, it’s being round, having seas and continents, and so on. The Red Indians had no such theory, or if they did it was wrong.

    Read More
  106. @RadicalCenter
    I'm guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States -- CA and TX -- in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you're overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I'm both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    Perhaps someone should explain to Señor Trump and the Trumpistas that PRs are not immigrants–in United Statesian territory at least.

    Read More
  107. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Question…

    Is it ‘white privilege’ if the white person is a homo?

    Is that like a get-out-of-jail card for white privilege?

    But isn’t that Homo Privilege? To be excused of the stain of ‘white privilege’ just because you happen to be homo?

    And then…. where does the logic of homomania lead to?

    Incestomania? If you follow the moral logic of the homo agenda, one would have to say yes to ‘incest marriage’.

    Read More
  108. @Jason Liu
    Sure, but normality IS privilege to the social justice whiners. It implies an automatic inequity (vs the non-normative).

    In their world, everybody should be "normalized", with no regard to history, demographic dynamics, or any other distinction.

    Liu gets it.

    Read More
  109. @RadicalCenter
    I'm guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States -- CA and TX -- in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you're overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I'm both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    You’re confusing mestizos with indios. Hint: if they don’t speak Spanish, they aint mestizos.

    Read More
  110. @RadicalCenter
    You're assuming that the Mexican spouse -- or should I say "partner" -- will assimilate to the traditional American culture, language, and way of life.

    I wouldn't be so sure of that. The non-Mexican partner may well assimilate more to the Mexican, or at least Mexamerican hybrid culture, especially for couples who live in majority-Mexican towns/cities.

    To the extent that the latter is true, Mexican-white intermarriage / procreation may hasten, rather than slow, our country's slide into some sort of disgusting hybrid Mexicanized culture.

    You’re assuming that the Mexican spouse — or should I say “partner” — will assimilate to the traditional American culture, language, and way of life

    Since Mexicans themselves tend to lose the Spanish language (only 17% of Mexicans whose grandparents were born in Mexico but parents were born in the USA can speak fluent Spanish) it is likely that this process will be even more accelerated within mixed marriages.

    I only know two people who are products of Hispanic-White marriages. Neither one speaks conversational Spanish; vocabulary is limited to words such as “grandma.” One of them grew up in suburban LA. Have you had different experiences?

    One of the people I know married a blonde, blue-eyed American woman and their 1/4 Mexican kids are simply white looking. They might check off Hispanic when applying to schools if it helps them, but functionally they are basically just white Americans.

    The actress who played an assistant D.A. on Law and Order, Alana de la Garza, is half Mexican and half Irish-American. Her husband is white – here she is with their 1/4 Mexican kids:

    http://i.skyrock.net/6930/31526930/pics/3189398477_1_4_Fkhgm57J.jpg

    Read More
  111. @Mao Cheng Ji
    Race-mongering, on both sides, is a disgrace, profanation of politics, and a recipe for decline and failure. Waste of bandwidth. Fuhgeddaboudit, talk about economics and geopolitics.

    This is a nicely done black eye to the stinking DNC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=567SjNPAnrI

    Read More
  112. And I have a feeling that Hispanic as well as white factors will continue to marginalize black political clout.

    Right. Insofar as Hispanic political power is likely to coalesce first in California, then Hispanic power will give lip service to blacks but not much else. CA is far less black than the east and south (even L.A. county is only 9% black). Plus, CA browns aren’t exactly brothers-in-arms with the former inhabitants of Compton:

    https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2013/01/15/latino-gang-leader-convicted-la-ethnic-cleansing-campaign

    Read More
  113. @RadicalCenter
    I'm guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States -- CA and TX -- in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you're overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I'm both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    “Also think you’re overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites.

    The data say about 26% of all Hispanics marry outside their race (see one of my other posts here), and that about 2/3 of such marriages involve Hispanics marrying whites.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    Sorry, you are mistaken.

    http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/19/no-hispanic-surge-on-the-horizon/

    “A recent CDC survey reports that Hispanic total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen for an unprecedented eighth straight year, while the percentage of children born to Hispanic parents has fallen for seven years in a row.

    The national fertility rate is 1.86 children per woman, well below the 2.1 replacement level; it varies among racial groups with Asian and American Indian women on the low end and black and Hispanic women on the high end. Hispanics’ total TFR stood at 2.15 in 2013, dropping from 2.35 in 2010. (These numbers mirror similar trends overseas.) While Hispanics overall still have a TFR above replacement level, the same isn’t true for native-born Hispanic Americans.”

    it is the Mexicans who will be the largest racial group, i.e., a plurality, and they’ll almost certainly be the solid majority in our two most populous States, California and Texas. Not too far in the future, either.

    Doubtful. Currently non-Hispanic whites are about 62% of the population, Hispanics 16%. The latter were projected, in 2008, to become 30% by 2050. At that time, non-Hispanic whites were projected to be 46.6%, blacks 14.4% and Asians 7.7%. Since then immigration has slowed and Hispanic projections are a little lower. Under Trump’s probable policies this may be even lower still. If it happens, it will be sometime around the turn of the 22nd century.

    Read More
  114. @Jason Liu

    Let it be said I am a believer in the fact of white privilege, as well as its beneficiary.
     
    Wait a second, you're white?

    Jesus, Peter. I've been reading you for years and I always thought you were Chinese. Is that like a German "Lee" or what?

    Check out his picture at Asia Times.

    Read More
  115. It seems to me that blacks need whites more than the other way around. Exhibit 1; the overlay of IQ charts in the “The Bell Curve” (page 267 in my copy). To save you looking it up, the black mode is about 2/3 of the white mode. Assuming intelligence as measured by IQ is a rough measure of individual social worth, black people would be better off avoiding all other blacks all the time. Just a matter of the numbers. Personally I try judge people as individuals in a situation, but sterotypes exist for good reasons. Someday I might need to pick a basketball team.

    But I do note that Jimmy the Greek’s prediction that blacks would take over sports has not come true.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    "But I do note that Jimmy the Greek’s prediction that blacks would take over sports has not come true."

    Football and basketball are majority black.

    Baseball is a joint Hispanic/white operation.

    Hockey, Golf, and Tennis are overwhelmingly white.
  116. US “Hispanics” have longer life expectancy than either non-Hispanic “whites” or “blacks”.

    US “Asians” have the longest life expectancy.

    Since the “Hispanics” have a lower income level than “whites” and “Asians” this is supposed to be a paradox:

    http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2013/us-hispanics-life-expectancy.aspx

    There is also some indication that the “Hispanic” life expectancy decreases to the US “white” average the longer the “Hispanic” sample has been in the US.

    So why would US ethnic Mexicanos and Latinos want to be shorter-lived, assimilated non–hispanic whites?

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. A. Costa
    Also here:

    http://www.ecology.com/2013/04/01/us-life-expectancy-mortality-rates/
  117. “The GOP, at least in the eyes of liberal critics, had in contrast committed itself irrevocably to serving as the party of the white as the Democrats scooped up the rest of the rainbow”

    How long did it take you to reach that conclusion?
    Welcome to the new world.

    Read More
  118. @E. A. Costa
    US "Hispanics" have longer life expectancy than either non-Hispanic "whites" or "blacks".

    US "Asians" have the longest life expectancy.

    Since the "Hispanics" have a lower income level than "whites" and "Asians" this is supposed to be a paradox:

    http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2013/us-hispanics-life-expectancy.aspx

    There is also some indication that the "Hispanic" life expectancy decreases to the US "white" average the longer the "Hispanic" sample has been in the US.

    So why would US ethnic Mexicanos and Latinos want to be shorter-lived, assimilated non--hispanic whites?
    Read More
  119. @WorkingClass
    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It's not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It’s not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    Yep. It’s a strategy that is working out very well for the elites.

    Read More
  120. @eah
    The lynchpin is the assumption that inequality is bad

    That's only part of it -- inequality is seen as a kind of social pathology, but predominantly when it crosses racial/ethnic lines (everyone accepts that some Whites will be more successful than other Whites) -- here the real "lynchpin" is that this inequality is due to discrimination/racism -- but this is irrational/counter-factual because it ignores significant differences between races, eg average cognitive ability -- the truth is, no matter how level the playing field, and even if 'white privilege' (whatever that is) were completely eliminated (however one might do that), Blacks would still form an underclass.

    — but this is irrational/counter-factual because it ignores significant differences between races, eg average cognitive ability.

    The more factual reality is that elites (all IQ’s) protect themselves with Patronage (gatekeepers) and the “level playing field” (for e.g. cognitive ability) doesn’t apply. Power positions in society are often reserved (as they were in Middle Ages feudal Europe).

    In academia and the media new entrants are vetted for PC views, and Jews in particular deploy racial patronage to obtain and hold a dominant positions. For example racial patronage rocketed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court (where she’s returning the favor), or the long line of patronage enabled Jewish FED chairmen. Cognitive ability may be a minor factor but many other potential Anglo candidates with the same or superior cognitive ability never get into the competition – because there is no competition. That’s how racial patronage works.

    Read More
  121. @AP

    White privilege is a myth. I have never heard of low IQ unqualified Whites getting a 6 or 7 figure a year jobs simply because of their White skin.
     
    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn't indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence. This can be repeated over and over again further and further down - some kid indifferent to education but raised in a white middle class environment will probably go to college and end up with a middle class job; a similarly unmotivated poor black kid in a poor black neighborhood may not finish high school and will either work low wage jobs or live very modestly off government assistance.

    Leftists will say that privilege is a reflection of current ongoing racism, and they are for the most part wrong. It seems to rather reflect dysfunctional culture among particular subcultures, alongside lower accumulated capital, with past historical injustice explaining in large part how this situation came to be. The Affirmative Action examples you describe are merely attempts to compensate for the past injustice.

    You must be one of those Liberals who believe life for White people is like that Saturday Night Live skit with Eddie Murphy.
     
    I'm not a Liberal but I'm one of those people who don't watch enough TV to know your reference. Obviously there are many white people whose lives are worse than those of many black people. But, as on the intelligence bell curve, despite some overlap, overall blacks tend to be doing poorly relative to whites.

    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn’t indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence.

    George W. Bush is smarter than you

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Sailer provided a good estimate of Dubya's IQ when he was a young man as being around 125 - well above average for the general population but that of a typical, average doctor:

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/this-just-in-kerrys-iq-likely-lower-than-bushs

    If rumors about his chronic substance abuse are true, it may have dropped a few points by the time he was president, into the "high average" range (110-119).

    He was clearly not the dummy portrayed in the mass media, but not so brilliant that his situation in life - from Yale, to the presidency - would have have occurred had he not been quite privileged due to his family background.
  122. @Johann Ricke

    You are attacking a strawman. White privilege doesn’t indicate that whites have advantages in ways that are explicitly labelled as being due to their skin color. Dubya was white. His IQ was probably not low, but merely above average. He did much better in his life than would be expected simply on the basis of his intelligence.
     
    George W. Bush is smarter than you

    Sailer provided a good estimate of Dubya’s IQ when he was a young man as being around 125 – well above average for the general population but that of a typical, average doctor:

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/this-just-in-kerrys-iq-likely-lower-than-bushs

    If rumors about his chronic substance abuse are true, it may have dropped a few points by the time he was president, into the “high average” range (110-119).

    He was clearly not the dummy portrayed in the mass media, but not so brilliant that his situation in life – from Yale, to the presidency – would have have occurred had he not been quite privileged due to his family background.

    Read More
  123. @E. A. Costa
    "There is considerable spittle devoting to rebutting the idea" ?

    Poor figure of speech, even worse typo.

    Actually the most obvious oddity about the presidential election is that both candidates were centered in New York.

    Apparently now that Gore Vidal is gone no one is penetrating enough to stumble upon the obvious.

    Does this herald, as Vidal now and then treated, a change in the equilibirum between Washington and New York City? Nowadays between the political and the financial?

    Either way Wall Street, and all that implies, was going to win. With Señor Trump the weight has shifted even more overtly than it would have with Señora Clinton.

    Does this herald, as Vidal now and then treated, a change in the equilibirum between Washington and New York City? Nowadays between the political and the financial?

    Washington has always been New York’s concubine (Wall Street’s, to be specific); ’twas always thus and ’twill always be.

    Read More
  124. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
     
    No, Simpson was acquitted because he had $50 million to spend for getting himself acquitted.

    What you're describing, I don't know how accurate it is, but even if it is, it's a minor technical detail. If he was a working stiff - black or white or blue or yellow - he would've probably been convicted in 10 minutes, without even going to trial. The public defender would've made a deal with the prosecution, and voila: the life sentence, parole on 25 years. Or something.

    The gloves didn’t fit and the main police officer witness proved himself to not only be bigoted but a serial liar.

    Read More
  125. Compared to the milquetoast, pro-immigration Romney in 2012, Trump won less of the “white” and more of the “minority” vote. Tightly restricting immigration and reversing the bipartisan neoliberal consensus benefits everyone, even if the “minorities” who realize this are afraid to say so for fear of being accused of race treason.

    Read More
  126. Reports of the minoritization of whites are radically premature. Whites aren’t waiting 35 years or even a presidency longer to gut or repeal the 1965 Immigration Law, the Hart-Cellar Act, which has facilitated the dispossession of whites in their own nation by tens of millions of foreign affirmative action beneficiaries, unassimilable hostiles, and government dependents living on the shrinking redistributed wealth of whites. Trump’s campaign was propelled by the timed release of Ann Coulter’s massive best-seller, Adios America, which Trump read. Ann and Trump spoke about the implications of the book at Trump’s behest. The end of mass immigration to America is coming soon. That’s why Trump will be occupying the White House on Jan. 20, 2017.

    Read More
  127. @CK
    Simpson was acquitted because Race trumps gender.
    The prosecution team was sure a jury of women would vote
    guilty.
    The defence team agreed on a jury of women ( black )
    because they knew that race trumps gender in the
    victimization hierarchy.
    Had Simpson been another rich white LosAngeleno
    that same jury would have fried his ass.

    The legal arguments made by the “dream team” gave the jurors plausible deniability. Most of them probably didn’t need that, but one juror can hang the jury.

    Read More
  128. @Jefferson
    "wonder how it would have played out of Nicole Simpson was black.

    Suppose OJ killed an estranged black wife.

    How would the jury have reacted to that one?"

    What if George Lucas had murdered his Black wife? Would a jury of White liberal women in Marin County, California where he resides have acquitted him?

    Mr. and Mrs. Lucas were involved in a big controversy in Chicago over a museum they wanted to build on the lakefront. Lakefront preservationists objected and Mr. and Mrs. Lucas wouldn’t compromise so they took their ball and bat and went home to the Bay area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    Did Chicago run out of lake front airports to commandeer?
  129. @RadicalCenter
    I'm guessing that you live in the NYC area and/or FL, with the partial focus on Puerto Ricans and Cubans.

    PRs are an insignificant portion of the population nearly everywhere in the country. Mexicans VASTLY outnumber PRs in our most populous States -- CA and TX -- in Illinois, across the Midwest and Plains, and nationally.

    As for Cubans, they have certainly spread beyond South Florida. But they too are an insignificant portion of the population in most of the rest of the country, and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.

    Also think you're overestimating the likely incidence of Mexicans (meaning mestizo, not white Mexicans) intermarrying with whites. In absolute numbers that will be a major phenomenon, sure. But in relative terms, there will be far more mestizo Mexicans marrying other mestizo Mexicans, as there are entire cities (Santa Ana, CA) and towns where the supermajority of the population is mestizo Mexican, approaching 90-100%, with little daily interaction with non-Mexicans on the street, in the workplace (where applicable, LOL), and in school.

    Also, just a guess here, but I'm both expecting and hoping that Africans will constitute closer to 10% rather than 15% of the population. Guessing that because of their uniquely self-destructive behavior and intra-racial violence, and because Africans (like the rest of us) in the USA will be swamped by the overwhelming numbers of Mexicans.

    No way in Hell are mestizo Mexicans moving anytime soon toward a birthrate comparable to white Americans or asian Americans.

    “and in many large States (CA, TX, IL) are outnumbered by Mexicans more than ten to one.”

    I don’t doubt it’s true of CA and TX, but there’s a very significant Puerto Rican community in Chicago.

    Read More
  130. @willieskull
    It seems to me that blacks need whites more than the other way around. Exhibit 1; the overlay of IQ charts in the "The Bell Curve" (page 267 in my copy). To save you looking it up, the black mode is about 2/3 of the white mode. Assuming intelligence as measured by IQ is a rough measure of individual social worth, black people would be better off avoiding all other blacks all the time. Just a matter of the numbers. Personally I try judge people as individuals in a situation, but sterotypes exist for good reasons. Someday I might need to pick a basketball team.

    But I do note that Jimmy the Greek's prediction that blacks would take over sports has not come true.

    “But I do note that Jimmy the Greek’s prediction that blacks would take over sports has not come true.”

    Football and basketball are majority black.

    Baseball is a joint Hispanic/white operation.

    Hockey, Golf, and Tennis are overwhelmingly white.

    Read More
  131. @Hibernian
    Mr. and Mrs. Lucas were involved in a big controversy in Chicago over a museum they wanted to build on the lakefront. Lakefront preservationists objected and Mr. and Mrs. Lucas wouldn't compromise so they took their ball and bat and went home to the Bay area.

    Did Chicago run out of lake front airports to commandeer?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    Yeah, there was only one; its site is connected to the mainland by a narrow causeway and I don't think it could be used for the museum without really overwhelming infrastructure expenditures. Also, it's been a park for a while now and would run into the same environmental opposition and legal hurdles as the first proposed site.
  132. @Anonymous
    Trump will slaughter the blacks.

    Trump will slaughter the blacks.

    Why bother? They’re doing a fair enough job of that on their own.

    Read More
  133. @OutWest
    Did Chicago run out of lake front airports to commandeer?

    Yeah, there was only one; its site is connected to the mainland by a narrow causeway and I don’t think it could be used for the museum without really overwhelming infrastructure expenditures. Also, it’s been a park for a while now and would run into the same environmental opposition and legal hurdles as the first proposed site.

    Read More
  134. From a black attorney with a Harvard Law School degree, here is an inspired way to wage war on “white privilege:”

    Here’s How Black People Could Use Jury Nullification To Break The Justice System
    From newsletter “Above The Law”
    By Elie Mystal
    Dec 7, 2016

    I’ve got a way to make them ‘feel’ it, brother.

    African-Americans live in a world where the police can murder us and get away with it. There is no justice for black people. And yet violently revolting against the system will get us nowhere.

    Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children….

    Maybe it’s time minorities got in the game?

    Black people lucky enough to get on a jury could use that power to acquit any person charged with a crime against white men and white male institutions.

    Murder? … Black people ARE BEING MURDERED, and the system isn’t doing a damn thing to hold their killers accountable. Sorry I’m not sorry if this protest idea would put the shoe on the other foot for a change.

    http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/heres-how-black-people-could-use-jury-nullification-to-break-the-justice-system/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23
    Interesting comment. Either different races integrate for E Pluribus Unum or they separate under Multiculturalism.

    No prize for guessing which one leads to division, conflict and civil wars.

    If people emigrate to the US with no intention of integrating, then they aren't planning on becoming Americans in any real sense, so they need to stay where they are or move to Germany where anyone is accepted, no questions asked.
    , @Authenticjazzman
    " Harvard law school degree", first of all a Harvard law degree nowadays simply indicates that the person involved may perhaps be able to read at second grade level and perhaps even count to ten, but otherwise it is worthless BS.
    Secondly fact is that the lot of the ivy league communist indoctrination camps and the involved "Professors" ARE the root of just about all of societal woe and until the glaring issue of leftist professors is finally profoundly addressed, things will just get crazier and crazier, until the country implodes, as these perfidious bastards are pushing year by year millions of brainwashed neurotic young people into society with the inevitible and obvious results.

    Authenticjazzman, "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

  135. @CCZ
    From a black attorney with a Harvard Law School degree, here is an inspired way to wage war on “white privilege:”

    Here’s How Black People Could Use Jury Nullification To Break The Justice System
    From newsletter “Above The Law”
    By Elie Mystal
    Dec 7, 2016

    I've got a way to make them 'feel' it, brother.

    African-Americans live in a world where the police can murder us and get away with it. There is no justice for black people. And yet violently revolting against the system will get us nowhere.

    Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children….

    Maybe it’s time minorities got in the game?

    Black people lucky enough to get on a jury could use that power to acquit any person charged with a crime against white men and white male institutions.

    Murder? … Black people ARE BEING MURDERED, and the system isn’t doing a damn thing to hold their killers accountable. Sorry I’m not sorry if this protest idea would put the shoe on the other foot for a change.

    http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/heres-how-black-people-could-use-jury-nullification-to-break-the-justice-system/

     

    Interesting comment. Either different races integrate for E Pluribus Unum or they separate under Multiculturalism.

    No prize for guessing which one leads to division, conflict and civil wars.

    If people emigrate to the US with no intention of integrating, then they aren’t planning on becoming Americans in any real sense, so they need to stay where they are or move to Germany where anyone is accepted, no questions asked.

    Read More
  136. @CCZ
    From a black attorney with a Harvard Law School degree, here is an inspired way to wage war on “white privilege:”

    Here’s How Black People Could Use Jury Nullification To Break The Justice System
    From newsletter “Above The Law”
    By Elie Mystal
    Dec 7, 2016

    I've got a way to make them 'feel' it, brother.

    African-Americans live in a world where the police can murder us and get away with it. There is no justice for black people. And yet violently revolting against the system will get us nowhere.

    Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children….

    Maybe it’s time minorities got in the game?

    Black people lucky enough to get on a jury could use that power to acquit any person charged with a crime against white men and white male institutions.

    Murder? … Black people ARE BEING MURDERED, and the system isn’t doing a damn thing to hold their killers accountable. Sorry I’m not sorry if this protest idea would put the shoe on the other foot for a change.

    http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/heres-how-black-people-could-use-jury-nullification-to-break-the-justice-system/

     

    ” Harvard law school degree”, first of all a Harvard law degree nowadays simply indicates that the person involved may perhaps be able to read at second grade level and perhaps even count to ten, but otherwise it is worthless BS.
    Secondly fact is that the lot of the ivy league communist indoctrination camps and the involved “Professors” ARE the root of just about all of societal woe and until the glaring issue of leftist professors is finally profoundly addressed, things will just get crazier and crazier, until the country implodes, as these perfidious bastards are pushing year by year millions of brainwashed neurotic young people into society with the inevitible and obvious results.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
  137. @WorkingClass
    The ruling class discourages any talk of class distinctions because such talk is a danger to them. They encourage race distinctions because it is important to them to keep the working class at each others throat. It's not just liberals who buy the idea that Race trumps Class. Many of the commenters here agree with it.

    A good insight but the two categories are not comparable. Class standing can be changed, race cannot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    Class standing can be changed, race cannot.
     
    'Race' is not a category, 'race' doesn't exist. Race is a proxy for class.

    "Irish" and "Italian" used to be "races" on the US census. And then they weren't.
  138. @pelagic
    A good insight but the two categories are not comparable. Class standing can be changed, race cannot.

    Class standing can be changed, race cannot.

    ‘Race’ is not a category, ‘race’ doesn’t exist. Race is a proxy for class.

    “Irish” and “Italian” used to be “races” on the US census. And then they weren’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pelagic
    Previously you said:

    "A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males…"

    If "'race' does not exist" why do you use it as a concept to make this point about class?

    I get your emphasis on class and perhaps we agree that class distinctions are in practical terms more important than race per se. Yes, race is often a proxy for class (and vice versa), good indicators that "race" exists on some real level.

    I would argue that "class" is more difficult to define and substantiate than concepts of race.

  139. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Class standing can be changed, race cannot.
     
    'Race' is not a category, 'race' doesn't exist. Race is a proxy for class.

    "Irish" and "Italian" used to be "races" on the US census. And then they weren't.

    Previously you said:

    “A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males…”

    If “‘race’ does not exist” why do you use it as a concept to make this point about class?

    I get your emphasis on class and perhaps we agree that class distinctions are in practical terms more important than race per se. Yes, race is often a proxy for class (and vice versa), good indicators that “race” exists on some real level.

    I would argue that “class” is more difficult to define and substantiate than concepts of race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    'Race' does exist, of course, but it only exists in people's heads. Irish came to the US in late 19c, they were poor, they were rude, hotheaded and violent. A danger for any middle class person. So, they became a race, to be avoided. Similar with the Italians, who had had little respect for anyone's property. Many of them were anarchists (like Sacco and Vanzetti). Same thing.

    And then they raised out of poverty, most of them joined the middle class, their culture changed, and they had become, gradually, proper petit-bourgeois citizens. Their 'racial' characteristics disappeared.

    It's a bit different with the 'blacks', since they do have a different skin pigmentation, and therefore immediately recognizable, even if wearing white shirt, suit, and tie. Nevertheless, white shirt suit and tie do help a lot - a 'black' guy wearing business attire in not immediately perceived (or perceived not as much) as a different 'race'. So, like I said, 'race' is a proxy for class, or rather for social status... But capitalism does require a hierarchy or social statuses (classes), and therefore of 'races'.
  140. @pelagic
    Previously you said:

    "A billionaire black woman (like Oprah) is far more privileged than 99% of while males…"

    If "'race' does not exist" why do you use it as a concept to make this point about class?

    I get your emphasis on class and perhaps we agree that class distinctions are in practical terms more important than race per se. Yes, race is often a proxy for class (and vice versa), good indicators that "race" exists on some real level.

    I would argue that "class" is more difficult to define and substantiate than concepts of race.

    ‘Race’ does exist, of course, but it only exists in people’s heads. Irish came to the US in late 19c, they were poor, they were rude, hotheaded and violent. A danger for any middle class person. So, they became a race, to be avoided. Similar with the Italians, who had had little respect for anyone’s property. Many of them were anarchists (like Sacco and Vanzetti). Same thing.

    And then they raised out of poverty, most of them joined the middle class, their culture changed, and they had become, gradually, proper petit-bourgeois citizens. Their ‘racial’ characteristics disappeared.

    It’s a bit different with the ‘blacks’, since they do have a different skin pigmentation, and therefore immediately recognizable, even if wearing white shirt, suit, and tie. Nevertheless, white shirt suit and tie do help a lot – a ‘black’ guy wearing business attire in not immediately perceived (or perceived not as much) as a different ‘race’. So, like I said, ‘race’ is a proxy for class, or rather for social status… But capitalism does require a hierarchy or social statuses (classes), and therefore of ‘races’.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Peter Lee Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?