More From the Race Addicted


Our friend Abagond has done it again. One has to admire the tenacity of this guy! He’s so steeped, marinated, rolled, breaded, buttered and slathered in his cockamamie theories about white racism that he will accept input from any source whatsoever that agrees with him. No matter how disreputable.

In this case, the disreputable source is the Marxist Joe R. Feagin.

Feagin is a “sociologist.” I use the quotes around the word because all those who study the world around us, and human interactions are “sociologists.” Abagond, for example, though a dyed-in-the-wool, out and proud racist, is a sociologist. I’m a sociologist.

Feagin put together a publication called “The White Racial Frame: Centuries of Racial Framing and Counter-Framing.” Here’s an excerpt from a review of the book at Amazon:

Feagin shows that the white racial frame is both a product and producer of whites’ brute power and hegemonic dominance over people of color in shaping the modern world (i.e., slavery, colonization, and genocide). The frame might be viewed as the self-perpetuating racially-constructed motor of modernity. Feagin’s theoretical understanding of the white racial frame exposes weaknesses in the most widely accepted theories of modernity, which focus on capitalism, state formation, scientific progress and developments of civilization and civil society. Theoretical construction of the white racial frame subsumes these explanations as by-products of whites’ long history of exploitation, oppression and destruction of people of color. The frame is the source and foundational structure responsible for triggering the rapid rise of capitalism, states, scientific progress (whites had capital and time for science through living off slave labor and stolen natural resources of people of color) and civilization/civil societies.

Wow! Did you, dear reader, know that you did all that? Well, if you’re a white American, you did do all that, and are still doing it — whether or not you know it — according to Joe R. Feagin, his reviewer and Abagond, who quotes this Feagin guy as though he were actually dealing in facts. You didn’t know you were exercising “brute power and hegemonic dominance over people of color in shaping the modern world,” now did you?

Well, how could you?  You weren’t. This is simply still more paranoid maundering by a leftist moron who traffics in fabrications and all the usual tortured ratiocinations of the pseudo-intellectual left. It suffices merely to re-read the paragraph above to know that you are dealing with the typically wacky incoherence of thought on the American left.

If you slog through the reviewer’s paragraph, you recognize that you are reading the description of a true totalitarian state, one with vast, overwhelming, central control so that it can bring about a “rapid rise of capitalism, states, scientific progress” and maintain a structure within which whites could have “capital and time for science through living off slave labor and stolen natural resources of people of color.”

All that kind of stuff doesn’t just happen, after all — it requires planning, structure, forethought, and, of course, control. Vast, centralized control. In other words a structure that would never have permitted something such as, say, the United States of America to exist. The description of society given above does work for, say, Nazi Germany, or Mao’s China, or the Soviet Union. However, the significantly lesser control from the center, so characteristic of the United States for so long, does not allow anything remotely resembling what the reviewer describes.

Stipulate to everything that the reviewer says about America — before the American Civil War — and Feagin’s argument then falls completely apart after the Civil War.

Of course things were not immediately fixed in terms of black-white relations, but they had started down the correct path.  Such a racist mindset as Feagin and his reviewer describe simply would not ever permit, for example, Eisenhower’s attempts to pass Civil Rights legislation in the 1950’s; Johnson’s passage of Civil Rights legislation in the 1960’s, affirmative action, or the transfer of more than six trillion dollars from whites to blacks in the years after the 60’s. It’s worth repeating: if this were such a racist country, in the iron-fisted control of those racist white people, then none of those things would have been remotely possible.

More to the point: White Americans had started their thoroughgoing project of introspection pertaining to their interaction with every conceivable defined demographic group there is — culminating recently in granting of marriage rights to gay people — long before the Civil War. The abolitionist movement was active in Europe and America more than a century before the Civil War hastened the end of the institution of slavery. Criticize white people for a lot of things — and I do — but one of them is most definitely, and obviously, not racism or bigotry. Just ask gays how they’re enjoying their shiny new marriage rights. You can sum up the white state of mind for the past more than five decades in one simple phrase: giving stuff — money, power, equal rights, additional rights, phones, and much more, both tangible and intangible — to aggrieved minority groups.

Furthermore, no one doubts that even if the Civil War had never taken place, slavery would have disappeared before 1900. White people had simply outgrown the mindset that permitted slavery in the first place. There is not a single, credible white group or person who has tried to argue in favor of slavery in more than 100 years. In the world.

Feagin’s reviewer at Amazon says that whites were engaged in genocide, but that flies in the face of his other argument: that whites were desperate to prosper from the labors of others. If they’re dead, you can’t get any work from them.  As horrible as the “Middle Passage” was, whites did their level best to keep the slaves alive. Coldly stated, they were worth no money dead.

Play a little thought game with me. Imagine that you own a racehorse. How do you treat that racehorse in order that he will perform the best possible for you? Do you starve him? Do you beat and chain and abuse him so that he is weak and frail? Of course not. You try to give him the perfect mixture of nutrition, exercise, TLC and attention that will maximize his productivity on your behalf.  Now, imagine that you have just paid a bunch of money for a bunch of slaves. How do you treat them in order that you profit the most possible from their labors?

Look, you and I both know that slavery itself is evil. That to profit from the uncompensated labor of others is just as wrong as it can be. But, you also know the answer to my second question — how do you treat your slaves to maximize their ability to work for you? The answer is you do as much as you possibly can to balance their good health with sufficient security so they don’t escape. As you do with any creature whom you view as a commodity or a possession. The simple point is: there was no attempt at genocide. There’s still no justification for slavery, but genocide was never part of the “plan.”  Why? Dead slaves were lost money. The other point: much of the other stuff in what Feagin writes is fabricated as well.

And, yes, Abagond himself has produced yet another screed, this one based on the paranoid fantasies of Joe. R. Feagin, certified anti-American leftist nutcase.

I’ve re-produced the post below, with my own comments in square brackets and red font.

— BEGINNING of ABAGOND’s POST —

white racial frame

Tue 6 Aug 2013 by abagond

fareed-zakaria

Fareed Zakaria: brown skin, white mind

The white racial frame (1600s- ) is the frame through which White Americans and the whitewashed make sense of issues about race. [Here he goes again. Again, Abagond tells us all what others are thinking. In this case, Abagond tells us what people were thinking more than 400 years ago! Either he’s a bloomin’ magician…or he’s a nitwit. I’m going with nitwit. Would he accept others telling him how black people think, what makes them do what they do, what they want, feel and need? Of course not. Nor should we accept Abagond’s nonsensical presumption that he can read others’ minds.] It is made up of stereotypes, images, narratives, mythology, history that is played up, history that is played down, etc. It is expressed – and strengthened – through jokes, slurs, discrimination, institutions, heroes, holidays, hatred, Hollywood stereotypes, etc.  [At least he admits that Hollywood, long a bastion of bien-pensant liberals, convinced they are ever so much better than you and I, were racists.]

It is sociologist Joe R. Feagin’s take on the white lens. [It’s this  “take” that Abagond endorses as true.]

The white racial frame makes sense of racial inequality in American society, excuses it, makes it seem “natural”, “fair”, even “post-racial”! [Again, the error here is basic and, one would think, easy to avoid. There are simply no white people in any numbers who are okay with racial inequality. First, let’s set something straight. There can never be any such thing as “racial equality.” Take all measures of “equality” that you can possibly conceive of, and no race will ever have the same overall “score” for any measure. All you can possibly do is to establish a structure that guarantees equality of opportunity. Nothing more.]

  • It lies about how whites got so rich. [Again, a basic, but purposeful error. This “lying accusation” is a staple of the left, and it’s easily disproved. First of all, no one ever knows when someone else is lying. For example, if someone is convinced of the truth of what he says or writes, then even if it’s flat out false, he’s not lying.  However, if one can besmirch the character of a writer by accusing him of being a liar, then everything he says or writes is suspect. Hence, frequently, the very first point of a leftist in any argument is the accusation of lying. It’s not always the lying accusation. It could be the racism or the sexism or the homophobia accusation, or anything that casts aspersions on someone’s character, but when arguing with a leftist, expect the character attack to appear early on. Note where the accusation appeared in Abagond’s list of charges. The very first thing. Next: the “peculiar institution” was not an economically feasible model. Going back to my racehorse analogy, above, if the racehorse doesn’t win, then the owner loses money. Racehorses need food, facilities, warmth in the cold, and an appropriate level of rest and all the rest of the stuff that keeps a racehorse in optimal physical condition so he can continue to race. People need all these same things.  In addition, these particular human beings — slaves — required enough security forces to keep them from escaping. That meant men and arms. Neither of these were cheap. If you have studied the history of slavery at all, then you know that it was not a guaranteed money maker for those involved with it. Many slave owners freed their slaves, not because the owners were such good people, but because it simply didn’t pay to keep them, and they couldn’t sell them. Mechanization, just starting up in the middle of the nineteenth century spelled the doom of slavery as it was. Machines were, and remain, a lot cheaper to maintain than people. Slavery was an institution on borrowed time before the Civil war on economic terms alone, never mind the fact that white people were increasingly turning against it in disgust.]
  • It tells them that they are good people, more moral than ever before, that blacks and other people of colour are screwed up. [Of course, nothing anywhere  tells whites “that blacks and other people of colour are screwed up.” No broadcaster, books, pundits, commentators, columnists, analysts, historians, teachers, parents — no one is giving white people that message. In any numbers. Yes, surely there are a few saying this, but they are so overwhelmed by the millions and millions of messages to the contrary, that the negative messages are as good as non-existent.]
  • It shapes institutions and is shaped by them. [See the note above. Institutions in America are structured to maximize racial harmony, because racial discord threatens the safety, work and progress of the institution. All institutions.]
  • It shapes white thought and character. [Well, everything shapes white thought and character. Everything shapes the thinking and character of all peoples. However, shaping white people’s thinking and character much more significantly is a simple desire: that black people prosper, and enjoy happiness, good health, long life and deep personal fulfillment alongside and with white people. That sums up white thinking. Sorry, it just does.]
  • It is learned from parents, teachers, friends, the media, etc. [Actually, the state of mind that I described just above — not Abagond’s and Feagin’s paranoid drivel — comes from “parents, teachers, friends, the media, etc.”…and more.]
  • It is ingrained into every person brought up as White American, from rednecks to senators to white liberal professors. It becomes like a second skin, one they are blind to. [Can you even imagine the sheer arrogant presumption of this moronic utterance? Can you even imagine what everyone — white, black, yellow or brown — would say if a white person said of black people, “It is ingrained into every person brought up as Black American, from rednecks to senators to black liberal professors. It becomes like a second skin, one they are blind to.” Important Note: By using this illegitimate tactic — telling us all what others are thinking — Abagond grants permission for others to use the same illegitimate tactic. It doesn’t change the fact that it’s an illegitimate tactic.  We Conservatives shouldn’t stoop to such moronic generalizations in our discourse, and we should call the left on it when they do it. Every time.]

It is profound and hard to shake: The changes after the Civil War and during the civil rights movement did not affect the deep structure of racism. [Abagond’s error here is a basic one. States of mind are not static. They are always moving in a direction. America had been moving away from white racism since a very long time before the Civil War. Sorry, Abagond, that’s simply undeniable. Today’s race pushers, such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Joe Feagin, the Democrat Party leadership and others, have been working hard to slow the rate of racial progress — with considerable success — for the past 50 years. ]

Compare:

By 1700 White American scientists, ministers, thinkers and leaders were already stereotyping blacks as:

  • different looking in skin colour, hair and lips, [Ummmm…ok. This is not a stereotype. One can tell a black person by the color of his skin, hair and, frequently, lips.]
  • disagreeable in smell, [This is easy to debunk. The extent to which a smell is disagreeable or not is purely subjective, governed entirely by the person perceiving the aroma. Easiest example of this, if a bit crude: ask anyone in a closed car in which someone has had a bit of flatulence. 🙂 As a white person myself, I can tell you that I’ve never heard anyone tell me that black people smell bad. Sometimes anecdotal evidence is useful. Throughout life, I have been paying attention — for a long time. If this were as common as Abagond seems to think it was and is, I’D have heard about it. A lot.]
  • being like monkeys,
  • unintelligent,
  • uncivilized, alien, foreign,
  • immoral, dangerous, given to crime,
  • lazy,
  • oversexed,
  • ungrateful, rebellious, [Let’s concede this point, and the six bullet points above. By 1850, however, Americans were moving quickly away from these ignorant impressions.]
  • having disorganized families. [This remains a “stereotype.” Unfortunately this “stereotype” is also a fact. Seventy-five percent of black babies are born out of wedlock today. See if you can guess what is the overwhelmingly primary predictor of future social failure for a child. Yep. Single-mother upbringing. The difference, however, is that the vast majority of whites blame other whites for putting in place the structures that have led to something like the gigantic out-of-wedlock birth rate that we see among blacks today. No, a much more prevalent image is of the well-meaning, but misguided, liberal who has replaced the black father with a welfare check. The idea of the “disorganized black family,” whether accurate or not is a very recent image, and causes whites to reproach other whites.]

Whites were the opposite of all that, the model majority. [Again, let’s stipulate to this. By 1850, however, whites were increasingly suffused with a state of mind dominated by guilt and a desire to atone for their past sins; precisely the opposite state of mind that Abagond describes. (He can’t contradict this, because I’m a white guy; therefore I know, and he couldn’t possibly. 🙂 ) This state of mind would reach critical mass only in the 1950’s  — overcoming dogged resistance from leftists and Democrats — when President Eisenhower introduced Civil Rights legislation. He was blocked in this effort by Congressional Democrats, but the ball was rolling faster now.] These stereotypes were based not on close observation and study but on what excused keeping blacks as slaves, raping their women, breaking up their families, overworking them, keeping them like animals, etc. [We debunked this above, but the point here is: Slavery ended in the 1860’s, and crimes against black people, and women in particular, diminished rapidly after that. “…Breaking up their families, overworking them, keeping them like animals, etc,” refers to the era of slavery that ended in the 1860’s. If, however, Abagond is referring to the breakup of the black family today, then he, and others like him, need to start opposing, and stop voting for Democrats. Duh! After the abolition of slavery, white people began a long, bumpy, but successful trek toward the eradication of racism within their ranks. Now there are so few actual racists among white people that jaywalking is a more serious problem in America. This bears repeating: If America could have eradicated white racism in her left political wing and in the Democrat Party in particular, then white racism would have died completely before the 20th Century.]

In the 1990s, nearly 300 years later, a study of Taiwanese people who knew about Black Americans mainly from American film and television, found that they thought blacks were: [I’m absolutely in agreement that Hollywood is the most reactionary of powerful American institutions. Their current “J’Accuse!” mentality toward white people is, as is typical, 50 years behind the times.]

  • lazy,
  • unintelligent,
  • criminal,
  • violent,
  • dirty,
  • self-destructive,
  • ugly. [Again, if this is true, these are the impressions put forth by Hollywood, not by real people.]

While the white racial frame is pounded into the heads of Americans of colour through the media and schooling, Black, Latino, Asian and Native Americans each have their own counter-frames. [Ooooookay… did you know that you were governed by frames and counter-frames? No? Well, that might be because you aren’t.]

  • White racial frame: Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Fareed Zakaria
  • Counter-frame: Rev Jeremiah Wright [Sorry…Wright is a racist sleazeball. He is probably the perfect exemplar of “The Big Difference:” White people hope and pray for uplift, prosperity and success for black people; black racists like Jeremiah “G-d America” Wright and others hope to bring white people down, as much as, if not more than they hope for black prosperity. Don’t tell me I can’t tell them what they’re thinking…they say it!]

While the whitewashed use the white racial frame, most people of colour use both the white racial frame and a counter-frame. [Now we’re into whacka-doodle psycho-babble gobbledy-gook.]

The liberty-and-justice frame: Most white people do not have any racial counter-frame. But they do have the political liberty-and-justice frame they used to fight and overthrow the British, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence. It contradicts the white racial frame.

Blacks take that frame to its clear, anti-racist conclusions, but only a few whites do. [** Sigh ** Here’s Abagond back poking around in others people’s minds, as if he can just crawl in there, look around and know exactly what everyone else is thinking. He can’t of course. So, he has no idea whatsoever what white people think of the Declaration of Independence. Again, if Abagond were forced to remove all things that he couldn’t possibly know from what he writes, he’d be unable to write anything.] Most whites go with the white racial frame and save liberty and justice for speeches. Barack Obama avoided it completely when he ran for president in 2008. [Uhhh…yeah. Barack Obama has dealt with race only when he can add gasoline to a fire set by other race pushers, hucksters, pimps and addicts. But only as President of the United States. I mean, it’s not as though he’s operating from a position of power or influence or anything. That was sarcasm, Abagond. Look it up to understand what it means.]

The good news: Anything that is learned can be unlearned.

The bad news: The white racial frame is deeply ingrained in white history, institutions and character. [What if I were to say that the “Noble Victim” myth is “deeply ingrained in black history, institutions and character.”? Do you think that I could get away with that? Nope. Of course not. You and others would call me on it immediately. See if you can guess what your accusation would be. 🙂

If I weren’t then banned from future such discussions, I’d have to be sure never even to hint at such a thought. Why? I simply don’t get to tell you what black people are thinking. Why would we permit ignorant racists like Abagond to do the same nonsensical thing?

In vain will you tell me that Feagin, whom Abagond quotes, is white, so he can tell us all what all white people think. Truly, no single people are a monolith. Everyone knows this. We can only go on what we see around us, and the simple, obvious, truth is that white people have engaged in a long, profound process of introspection and soul-searching in terms of their interaction with all other peoples. 

Whites long ago began to find their own actions and thoughts wanting, and have been acting for more than 150 years to make restitution. This effort gained momentum over the years, and has been accelerating since the 1950’s. It’s evident in Civil Rights Legislation; in Affirmative Action; in restitution made to Japanese Americans interned in camps during World War II; in the transfer of more than six trillion dollars to black people in the past 50 years; in the color of the President’s skin; in the constant writing and re-writing of history to balance out perceived inequities, and much, much, much more.  

These things are not even debatable. A white majority that resembled one tenth of what Abagond and Feagin say — with their “white frame,” and “deeply ingrained racism,” and “systemic racism,” and “whitewashing,” and their misguided sense of racial superiority would never have permitted all these things. They could easily have prevented such admissions of past guilt and attempts at restitution. Yet, all the legislation and gestures mentioned above passed Congress with no shots fired, with barely a shrug of the shoulders from white people.(1)

What really happened? Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “We demand equal rights!” And white people, after a bit of thinking about it, basically shrugged their shoulders and said, “Ummm…ok.”

It was such a success, that others said, “Hey! Let’s try the same thing!” So, women, Japanese, Hispances, gays and, you name it, all lined up for — and got — theirs. This is not a racist country. And, frankly, white people are probably the least racist people on the planet. 

The sources that Abagond, and other race addicts, quote are deeply morally flawed people such as Louis Farrakhan, virulent racist leader of the Nation of Islam, the hyper-racist Al Sharpton and this Feagin joker, with his passionate, fatally flawed anti-American viewpoint. At some point, we can hope, the Abagond’s of the world will stop listening to charlatans, frauds and racists, and use their own eyes and ears.

The big question, of course, is why? Why jump through all these hoops to keep the comatose body of white racism alive, when it’s been moribund for decades? When it’s patently obvious that white people have long overwhelmingly abandoned any desire for segregation of the races; when it’s plain that white people have overwhelmingly abandoned misguided ideas of racial superiority; when it’s clear that the only state of mind whites have today — not all of them, but easily 99.9% or more of them — is one of outreach, which succeeded vast, public, loud self-examination, contrition, mind-boggling restitution and concession after concession, guilt-admission after guilt-admission. Mostly by whites who had nothing whatsoever to do with the wrongs in the first place. 

So, again: Why? 

Let’s concede the point that there has been bad. Real, palpable bad done to blacks, by whites, in the last 50 years. But, all that bad is attributable to policies implemented and promulgated by America’s Democrat Party, over the objections of America’s Republican Party who predicted the very pathologies we see afflicting blacks and their families today. Yet, even this evil was done at the demand of black “leaders” in the so-called “Civil Rights Establishment,” all to begin, so they said, to right the wrongs. 

Abagond and others like him, choose for sources only frauds, charlatans and racist mountebanks like Feagin, Farrakhan, Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others who have made a handsome living by keeping the long-dead spectre of racism alive. So, the answer to the question, “Why?” is: “Race addiction.” It pays handsomely to the pushers and it keeps the addicts happily mind-numbed, while serving as the main component of the addicts’ identity as Noble Victim. The Feagins of the world are the race pushers; the narcotic is racial hatred; the addicts are the Abagonds of the world. These last have for so long been duped into providing the ground troops for the rich pushers, that they can see, hear, know, understand nothing else.  Every problem in the world is caused by white racism. Yes, Every problem. Hurricane Katrina supposedly “wiped out” black populations in New Orleans. Why? Because of whites who refuse to address global warming in order to cause things like Katrina to kill blacks. Yep. That was an argument heard in the aftermath of that storm. On television, by “respectable” commentators.

Whenever the race pushers need to have a riot here, a demonstration there, anarchy here, chaos there, looting here, lawlessness and violence there — anytime the pushers need something to point to so they can be the first to scream, “Racism!” on television — they can count on a huge number of race addicts to answer their call, take to the streets, and repeat the mantra. Hopefully just before an election, so the Democrat Party masters can count on the automatic votes.

In a past on-line exchange, a colleague of mine forced a race addict to admit that any black person could succeed in America if he (1) got an education, (2) spoke well, (3) worked hard and (4) interacted well with others. She asked how that could possibly be true in this country supposedly awash in just-beneath-the-surface racism. Her interlocutor never even attempted to answer the question. Recognize the Denial component of addiction? that’s it.

Now, think to the riots and demonstrations you have seen on television lately — those in response to the Zimmerman-Martin verdict, or in response to anything — picture the black people in those riots and demonstrations… this one, for example. Now picture the ones pulling their strings and suggesting that they need to be in the streets. This one, for example. Why do the race addicts continue to feed the lavish lifestyles of the pushers? Addiction is a powerful force. 

We can all hope and pray that the addicts will wake up one day, and stop feeding the parasites that keep pouring gasoline on a fire that began dying down decades before they were born. A fire that could have died out completely if the pushers and addicts hadn’t kept it alive.

Summary: As you all know, this blog covers a lot of ground on a lot of topics. I have recently been following the race addicts, Abagond and Brotha Wolf, because it has been topical, and they neatly encapsulate in their writings all the myths, fables, half-truths, tortured illogic, twisted arguments and convoluted reasoning of the race grievance industry; an industry that exists only to find white racism under every rock and around every corner, and to deny that its long dessicated corpse is really dead. I’ve batted back all their nitwittery with one simple premise:

If this country is so racist and bigoted then explain the avalanche of pro-any-group legislation that has steadily poured forth from America for the past 50 years, and that continues still today.

The corollary is, of course, undeniable: this country, and its white majority, have been on a steady march away from white racism — or from prejudice of any kind(2) — for more than 150 years. 

Of course, none of that would have been possible if white people had simply decided against it.

It bears repeating from above: “You can sum up the white state of mind for the past more than five decades in one simple phrase: giving stuff to aggrieved minorities.” Whether for good or ill, that state of mind simply can not be characterized as “racist” or “bigoted.” Misguided? In many, many cases yes, absolutely…but not from any malice or prejudice. At least not on the part of the general public.

Since, this blog — with my colleagues’ and my writing — has  covered this subject comprehensively, we will be concentrating a bit less on our friends, Abagond and Brotha Cryin’ Wolf. Arguing with them is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel, and that becomes tedious after a while. They haven’t written anything that isn’t simply some new angle on the same old, discredited whining and moaning, for some time. We’ve given them lots of free exposure in very high places, so have served to increase their audience in ways they can’t possibly imagine. If they only knew, they’d have to pick up their jaws from the floor.  🙂 

However, as we predicted, the Zimmerman-Martin episode is fading. None of the promised “civil rights lawsuits” will happen — and why should they? they couldn’t possibly prevail because of those stubborn facts of the case, of which we have said much —  except, that is, for Zimmerman’s lawsuit against various media and authorities for prosecutorial malfeasance, false imprisonment, false prosecution and a whole pile of other misconduct. When Zimmerman wins those lawsuits, you will not hear about it in the dominant media. But we will bring it to you when it happens.

Tomorrow: Counter-frames

Source: Joe R. Feagin, “The White Racial Frame” (2010).

 

— END of ABAGOND’s POST —

— xPraetorius

(1) It should be noted that there was resistance from white people to things like Civil Rights legislation. It came from the Democrat Party. Without the support of Republicans — We covered this here — none of the Civil Rights legislation would have passed. In fact, Republicans voted for Civil Rights legislation by a much greater percentage — double digits every time! — than Democrats. Democrats were simply more numerous in the Houses of Congress at the time. Hence, in one of history’s great ironies, the party that resisted Civil Rights most vociferously was the party that blacks today credit with passing it.

(2) White people have even been aggressively marching away from prejudice against bad things! That’s not a good thing! More about this in future posts.

2 thoughts on “More From the Race Addicted

  1. Have you actually presented this beautifully done debunking of all his deranged “original sin” theories at his blog? I know most of his readers would have a brain hemorrhage reading this text (aka “this text triggers me/pisses me off but I dont know how to argue against it!!!!!11-! overload SYNTAX ERROR”) You have a new follower from the old continent for sure! 🙂

  2. Thanks, Kirkwall! A colleague of mine and I HAVE tried to engage him in discussion on his blog. First he erupted in a tirade of insults and jeering, as is typical of the left, then he censored our posts from his blog. This is the MOST typical behavior of the left: filtering out any and all dissenting points of view. It’s precisely because they are insecure in the strength of their arguments — with good reason — that they do this.

    One thing I’ve noticed about the left is that they do their level best to live in an echo chamber of views congenial to them. It’s why there even exists the accusation: “Oh, you watch FOX News!” They don’t understand that the REAL accusation is in the idea that they DON’T watch anything like FOX News — the only media outlet that consistently allows arguments that are counter to the left, a fair presentation.

    Best,

    — x

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