Race Addicts and Their Thoughts — You Read it Here First!

Abagond” does it again!

He’s produced a textbook piece containing all that’s wrong with the thinking of the race addicts.(1)

For the race addicts, white racism is Bernie from ” Weekend at Bernie’s (2) — only fifty years later. The skin, muscles, organs, heart and life left it long ago, but the race addicts, like Paulie, insist that it’s still alive and must be killed — again and again and again and again and again.

Between you ‘n me, the race addicts were thrilled to hear of the “not guilty” verdict, because this confirms, in their minds, the nonsensical conclusion that the deck is stacked against them due to white racism and white privilege. Oh, the deck just might be stacked against them, but it’s simply because they’ve allowed themselves to be seduced by the “race dealers” who are peddling the white racism narcotic.

There is a simple truth, and a colleague of mine was able to coax it out of one of the race addicts in a recent debate with him. The simple truth: If you are a black person, and (1) you get an education, (2) you speak well, (3) you work hard and (4) you get along well with others, then you can succeed in America. I’m sorry, but there is nothing racially wrong with such a society. A black person who has ignored the above-mentioned four things, is a race-addict-in-waiting.

I’ve reproduced Abagond’s rant/whine/essay in its entirety below. Again, it’s so dumb that I’m not sure how long he’ll keep it posted as is.

I’ve tried something slightly different this time. I highlighted in magenta all those parts where Abagond has presumed to tell us what other people are thinking — even though he couldn’t possibly have the slightest clue as to what they’re thinking.Abagond’s presumption that he can get inside all these white people’s head would be perfectly countered by his absolute insistence that no one could ever possibly get into black people’s heads…except other black people.

If you were then to remove all the things that Abagond couldn’t possibly know, then the entire essay falls completely to pieces. Or, put another way, Abagond’s entire rant — possibly his entire oeuvre! — is completely dependent on conclusions he’s drawn that he can’t possibly know.

In addition, I’ve added my own comments in-line in square brackets and in red font. Here’s the color key:

  • magenta font: Things Abagond wrote, that he can’t possibly know, but that he asserts as fact, as if he’s reading people’s minds
  • red font: My additional comments and reactions to the things that Abagond says.
  • Summary: “Abagond” is in black and magenta font; xPraetorius is in red font.

Below is how Abagond’s post appeared at 16:13 ET on 7/16/2013:


What did race have to do with the George Zimmerman case?

Mon 15 Jul 2013 by abagond


To some Americans Trayvon Martin looks like a dangerous person, even in this picture.

What did race have to do with the George Zimmerman case in America?George Zimmerman, a half-white, half-Latino man who gets a bloody nose and a few scratches on his head, shoots dead Trayvon Martin, an unarmed, 17-year-old black boy, calls it self-defence and is found “not guilty” of both murder and manslaughter by a nearly all-white court. How could that possibly be racist? I mean, it is not like Zimmerman used the N-word. It was a fair trial! Besides, the president is black!

Here are some ways:

  1. Black life was assumed not to matter much. In effect, a bloody nose and a few scratches on the head of a man who is half-white mattered more than the life of a 17-year-old black boy. It was not just Zimmerman who thought that, so did the police, who did not think the killing was a big deal. So did the prosecution, who pretty much just went through the motions – they did not even properly prepare their witnesses.
  2. The Black Brute stereotype – the idea that black men rape and kill for no reason, that they have “violent tendencies”, “criminal propensities”, as if huge numbers of them are savage psychopaths or something. It is why white women clutch their purses, why whites cross the street – because, apparently, black men only tug at purses gently, cannot cross the street and never go after those who show fear. This stereotype ran throughout the case: [Of course, this stereotype was never in evidence anywhere in the case. Abagond needs this paranoid fiction, or his entire premise falls apart completely.]
    • Zimmerman racially profiled Martin. [The FBI — the freakin’ FBI — concluded there was no evidence whatsoever to support this. By all appearances, they dug very, very deep to be sure to uncover any possibility that there might be such profiling going on. As it turns out, Zimmerman comes across in all stories except, understandably, that of the Martin family, as a genial, nice, kinda soft, all-’round good guy.] As a neighbourhood watchman, Zimmerman only reported black males as “suspicious”. [I don’t know whether or not this is true. Was that brought out in the trial? That Zimmerman had a history of calling the police only on black men? In theory, that would count as something the FBI would have red-flagged immediately as an indication that Zimmerman might have been a racist. Based on the lack of credibility this writer has everywhere else, I’m very much doubting the accuracy of the “only reported black males as suspicious” thing.] Martin was one of them, even though it was only seven at night and he was minding his own business walking back from 7-Eleven. It was not like Martin was breaking into a house or a car or beating up someone.
    • The police assumed Martin was the bad guy. Instead of giving Zimmerman a drug test and holding him for 48 hours while they sorted out what took place, the police let him go to work the next day! They believed his story just on his say-so – in part because it fit the Black Brute stereotype perfectly: some black guy jumped out at him in the dark and tried to kill him. For no reason. Because, apparently, black men are like mad dogs.
    • The prosecution lawyers never seriously questioned the main hole in Zimmerman’s story: Why in the world would Trayvon Martin want to kill George Zimmerman? [He might not have wanted to, but there is plenty of reason to believe that Martin wanted to administer a good thumping to Zimmerman…and that he could do that.] Martin did not know Zimmerman. Zimmerman says he did not threaten him. [Ummm…and you believe this? You’ve said that the Zimmerman sotry is nothing but a series of lies and fabrications and evidence of racial profiling, but you believe this assertion by Zimmerman. You can’t just go around selectively believing what fits your anrrative!!! Duh!] Martin had no record of violence or insanity. [Oh, I don’t know…the tweets made public — but not allowed in the presence of the jury — show a kid who has experimented with drugs, Mixed Martial Arts fighting, drugs, truancy and is prone to fits of temper. Sorry…it’s just true. That it never made it into the trial — for better or for worse — is the judge’s responsibility. It is out there, on Twitter, Facebook, etc. This blog found some of it quite easily.] The Black Brute stereotype is the spit holding this story together. [Neither the prosecution, nor the defense said that Trayvon Martin wanted to kill George Zimmerman. The point was only that George Zimmerman believed that he was in danger for his life, whether or not he was. There is no “Black Brute” stereotype…there is a “Brute” stereotype…Abagond is mysteriously silent on the Aaron Hernandez case, in which all people have come to regard Hernandez as a “brute.” And, frankly, he is. He’s freakin’ huge! And he’s gigantically strong. Am I the only one to notice that — presto-changeo — the very much Hispanic Aaron Hernandez is a “Person of Color?” (His biological parents are Dennis (deceased) and Terri. Not very Hispanic sounding names! I wonder if someone is going to get around to changing his race on him. after all, his alleged victim — Odin  Lloyd — was black(4)…) One more quick comment about the now famous “hoodie.” Frankly between you ‘n me, a hoodie does say “mysterious,” and “possibly up to no good,” and “suspicious.” Regardless of the race of the person wearing it. Sorry…it’s just true. Not sure what the weather was like on February 26th in Florida at 7:00pm or so, but that’s simply the impression a hoodie gives. One more quick thing: if I wanted to conceal my face, for whatever reason, but especially if I were up to no good, then I’d use a hoodie for that purpose.]
    • The defence lawyers painted Martin as a dangerous thug, based not on a police record or record of violence, but on how he looked! How was that possible? [Of course, the defense lawyers never once did any such thing. They never, ever, not ever, not once, portrayed the loss of Trayvon Martin as anything other than a terrible tragedy. Obviously if they wished to portray Martin as a “dangerous thug,” then they never would have said specifically that his death was a tragedy. They’d have said something much more nuanced.]
    • The jury was packed with white women. [If, as the writer seems to think, the Hispanic George Zimmerman was a “white” guy, then — guess freakin’ what: Zimmerman is constitutionally entitled to a jury of his peers. Not of Trayvon Martin’s peers. Duh! The only logical extension of his apparent thinking is that black defendants should have plenty of white people on their juries for their trials! Frankly, that is how it ought to be, except that the race addicts have insisted so freakin’ vociferously that only black people can be other black people’s peers, that they’ve forever poisoned the jury process for high-profile cases like this one.] We do not know what their thinking was. [Uhhh…Duh!! Only sensible thing he’s said yet! And he waits ’til the second to last sentence to say it!] Maybe they were not racist at all. [Big of him to admit that.] But the defence certainly assumed they were, playing on their purse-clutching fears of black men! [And, in his last sentence, Abagond completely negates the only sensible thing he said in the entire essay. I thought that just a nanosecond ago, he said the women of the jury “were not racist at all.” If they weren’t racist, then they had no “purse-clutching fears of black men,” and such a defense tactic would have failed miserably. Does this guy even read what he writes?!?]

— xPraetorius

(1) – “Race Addicts” – As far as I know, my coining of the term “race addicts” is the first time I’ve ever encountered it. Here’s my first stab at a definition for the term: The race addicts are those who are so emotionally, intellectually and spiritually attached to, and invested in, their, and their ancestors’, race-based victimhood, that they can’t see that it died and was buried decades ago. That’s what I mean for the purposes of this essay. However, I recognize that the definition is incomplete. I’ll try to complete it in the next post.

(2) – Weekend at Bernie’s: Two insurance company employees discover their boss, Bernie, has been murdered at his beach house in the Hamptons. Fearing they will be implicated in the murder, and using sunglasses, the two pass a harrowing weekend maintaining the illusion that Bernie has not died, for the usual weekend visitors to the beach house. Meanwhile, the murderer, “Paulie,” keeps falling for the illusion that Bernie is still alive and kills him, again and again. The movie ends with Paulie, who had successfully killed Bernie the first time, being carted away still insisting that Bernie is still alive. You can see why I made the parallel with the race addicts’ response to the Zimmerman verdict.

(4) Odin Lloyd:

Please Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s