Wading Into The Race Grievance Industry – Findings (Part VIII)

The next installment in our series on race, race relations and the Race Grievance Industry (RGI).

*** Special Edition: What we tried ***

Introduction: As most of you know already, our think tank engaged the Race Grievance Industry on its own turf in recent weeks. I went in armed with a premise — “White racism is not a big problem in America today” — and debated it on the blog of Abagond.

This is Part VIII of our series on what we found there. You can read Part I, here. Or see Part II, here. Part III is here. Part IV is here. Part V is here. Part VI is here. Part VII is here.

Our approach was simple: (1) I’d introduce the premise, (2) debate it, (3) accept none of the deflections that we knew would come fast and furious from Abagond and his disciples. You know the “arguments:” “You’re a racist!” “You’re a liar!” … and the like. We countered with the obvious: “You can’t know what I’m thinking; you can’t know what’s in my heart; why don’t you abandon the personal attacks and gratuitous insults and address my points?”

I then brought out, as needed, points, images, thought exercises, hypotheticals, logic, and, of course, undisputed facts.

All this transpired over two threads, the first one called “Was Hitler Evil?” and then “Notes on xPraetorius.”

Note: I had come in to the “Hitler” thread and made a pest of myself by introducing our premise, which was a direct contradiction to Abagond’s premise in the original blog post. After making a bother of myself, and somewhat to Abagond’s credit, he established the “Notes on xPraetorius” thread. Really, though, it was his way to take my discourse off to the side, without silencing me altogether which, he knew, would be a tacit admission of “defeat.”

What he didn’t know upon establishing the thread was that my firm defense of our premise, as well as my refusal to put up with any of the substanceless feculence that is the stock in trade of Abagond and his readers, so irritated these same readers that they couldn’t stay away! They all desperately wanted to launch at me one final devastating, sneering, jeering, put-down, so crushing in its scorching brilliance, that I’d put my racist tail between my bigoted legs and slink on out of there.

It never happened.

They came back again and again and again and again for more. They were the proverbial fish in a barrel, and I very much enjoyed interacting with them.

Here is Part VIII in the list of the things I tried, in roughly chronological order. Please keep in mind that everything I tried resulted — every time — in a flurry of accusations of racism or lying or both from someone. They were kind of like a work crew, taking shifts.

  • Sometimes I smoked them out. In the post in Note 1, “BrothaWolf” says flat-out, “this blog is meant for black people,” not for such as you. This was one of several references to the “echo chamber” that Abagond maintains. I have perused many exchanges on his blog, and when someone who disagrees gets too nettlesome, he simply bans the poster and rhetorically slams him or her without allowing retort.  BrothaWolf does the same on his blog. The RGI are nothing if not insular, insulated, isolated, and in “Fortress Mode.” Read BrothaWolf’s post here, in-context, or here, out-of-context. I highlighted the assertion in red.
  • BrothaWolf was useful for a very specific purpose: he was not good at hiding his agenda(s). In this exchange he does two things (1) he admits that he was trying to trap me, and (2) he unwittingly shows that he can’t possibly fathom the possibility that I simply might not be a racist. This tunnel-vision thinking was completely typical of Abagond’s readers. I responded, in Note 2, rather forcefully. You can read the exchange here, in-context, or here, out-of-context. I also re-named “BrothaWolf” to “BrothaDinosaur” to put the idea out that his ideas are from the dim, distant past.
  • Kwamla presented me with an opportunity to state some core beliefs. I’ve reproduced below in Note 3 my reply to him, because it contains also Kwamla’s post. You can read it all here, in-context, or here, out-of-context.
  • I missed an opportunity. BrothaWolf said: “It’s no different than telling others that what they think doesn’t matter. There clearly is no intellectual or moral reasoning behind such thinking.” I should have jumped all over that! Obviously, the Abagond crowd had been doing little more than telling me that “what I think doesn’t matter.” Worse, I missed yet another glaring opportunity in the same post! BW said: “There’s more than one perspective to the world.” Golly! That’s exactly what I’d been trying to get across to them for hundreds of posts. I didn’t reply to this except obliquely. A shame. You can read it all here, in-context, or here, out-of-context. I replied, with some background.
  • Sharina makes a very good — and controversial with this crowd! — point: Barack Obama was elected President of the United States solely because of the color of his skin. Some Democrats — Hillary supporters — had the temerity to point this out, and were sent to the woodshed for it. Sharina then goes off the rails and proves her ignorance with a wacko analysis of Herman Cain’s participation in, then departure from, the Republican presidential race in ’12. However, it is really good to see that there are some in the RGI who recognize that a white man with exactly the same life story as Obama’s could not have become President in ’08, or in ’12. You can read it all here, in-context, or here, out-of-context. This was an opportunity to make the obvious point (except to the Abagond crowd) that it was way more important in 2008 to elect a good President, than it was to elect a black one.

— xPraetorius

Notes Section:

Note 1: BrothaWolf’s post: White people are not welcome here.

Abagond and everyone,

I mean no offense, but xPraetorius is f**king with us. And it seems like he/they are enjoying it -judging by the number of smiley emoticons he leaves in his comments – so much because he got an audience that is willing and patient to put up with his cyberbullying.

It’s obvious he/they are not serious about this blog or any other anti-racism blog. Hence, he refers to us as race-baiters and members of the race grievance industry. He seriously thinks that we are just pimping out on oppression which he says doesn’t exist.

xPraetorius is not, nor has he/they ever been interested in learning, let alone discussing anything that matters to us. The only thing he is interested in is shoving his whiteness into our conversation. We all know he is a sad excuse for a human being for a number of reasons, but he/they are trying to pretend (assuming he is pretending) he is the innocent victim. He doesn’t want to admit that he is a problem.

For some reason, xPraetorius seems more interested in my and Abagond’s blog. He/They may have trolled in others, but it’s clear he thinks our purpose is a load of bull, and he/they seem quite proud in condemning others just because they have the nerve to talk about race.

Yes, he/they will shift the blame back onto us. He/They will read this message, will cross the words out and label – using his arrogant list – everything wrong according to him. He/They sees this as a game, and we are helping him play it by giving him/them the attention that all spoiled bratty children cry for. And I called him/them spoiled and bratty because his/their comments present themselves as such. Of course, he/they will deny it.

I’ve seen people, like this xPrae. They go around starting crap and will deny ever starting it. We all know that if this was real life, xPrae would not behave like this. That’s what makes it even more sad.

I would tell him/them what I really think, but I respect and admire Abagond’s blog too much to sink low enough to tell xPrae what he/they can do to him/themselves. Plus, I’ve wasted way too much time and energy on this fool, and with all due respect, so have you all. At first it was amusing, but it’s gotten old and stale. There are way more important issues to concentrate on, way more events going on that we need to address that are more important than this. He’s/They’re not even arguing anymore. He’s/They’re basically drowning and enjoying his mental suicide, and I won’t go down with him.

In all I’ve had enough of drones like xPrae. XPrae is nothing more than a white conservative, racist, immature maniac, or group of said maniacs, and I’ve closed the chapter on this fool.

xPrae, this blog and my blog were made by blacks for blacks and other POC. We didn’t make them for for the likes of you. If you don’t like it, you can…(censored)

Bye. (back to Note 1 introduction)

Note 2: In which BrothaWolf indirectly admits that he simply can’t envision the possibility that I’m just not a racist.

Brothawolf said:  

@Matari,Actually no. I finally took it in and took your words to heart.

Honestly, what took me long is hoping to somehow lead xPraetorius into a trap that would get himself banned, but it’s clear that xPraetorius is too clever not to slip up, but is too immature and having too much of a good time to leave himself.

Nope. xPraetorius will remain until he either moves on or he gets banned. Either way, I’m moving on for my own sake.

xPraetorius’ reply:

BrothaDinosaur: You just can’t fathom the possibility that I won’t “slip up” and fall into your clever traps and commit some racist slur, simply because I’m actually not a racist, can you? Just as you won’t find me robbing a package store, kicking kittens or taking candy from babies (except on this thread :) ), I won’t say a racial slur because I don’t have racist thoughts, feelings or inclinations of any kind.

You simply can’t get your mind around the fact that I consider you a person before I consider you a black person, can you? I won’t commit a racial slur, because it’s just not in me to do it.

You on the other hand have already done it to me — and you got away with it! Abagond didn’t say a word to you! I’m like no other white person you’ve ever perceived, and you can’t figure it out. Oh, I’m probably like 95% of the white people you’ve met, but it sure looks like as soon as you met ‘em, you saw only the color of their skin. So, I’m betting you prevented any engagement before it even started. In other words, it’s your perception that’s messed up! Challenge it!

Read this well: in your mind you made them racists before they said word one to you. You’re not part of the problem, you are the problem. Ok, let’s be fair. That’s the problem, and you help perpetuate it.

And, let’s be fair again…I don’t know your life story. Maybe you have experienced abuse at the hands of white people. I have too. That’s kind of inevitable; there’re a lot of ‘em around. But, did all white people abuse you, BD? Or just a few. And, even if it was for a long time, if it was only a few, then you still have no right to generalize across the entire population. Sorry; you just don’t. Oh, you will, I suspect, but you have no moral right to do so.

On this blog you met a stubborn white dude who wouldn’t let you get away with your bluster and your blather, and who treated you like a human being in full, and that completely flummoxed you; it threw you for a total loop. Read back at your huffing and puffing and blustering and fulminating and all your oh so righteous indignation…In a non-online interaction like this, if challenged, you’d never have allowed this to go on before storming off, yelling “Racist!” over your shoulder.

What you and the rest never figured out was that I’ve been treating you all like human beings in full. That means both looking at your perspectives and assessing them fairly, and looking you squarely in the eyes when you’ve messed up and calling you on it.

In one of the other threads, there was a “trainee barrister” who told of how she couldn’t stand the racism of the over-polite. Wow! She can tell that someone is racist when that person is being polite?!? Well, then, all she said was there was no point in being polite with her! To paraphrase Buzz Lightyear: what a sad, strange little woman! But, you know what, BW? Her perspective is not far from what you’ve expressed to me here.

Why would you want to lead such a blinkered, blind life? I understand not wanting to leave the comfortable, and challenge oneself, but you have to. Otherwise, you just stop and you stagnate, and before you shuffle off this mortal coil at 95, you find out you really stopped living the day you stopped growing.

Oh, and thanks for calling me clever, but I wasn’t trying to be clever…just myself. BD: There is no trap that you can set that can get me to use a racial slur, so why don’t you try actually to talk about my points. By the way: which button would you push?

So far, everyone has evaded the question. I find that very telling.

@Abagond: I answered your question; now man up and answer mine: (1) Do you think I’m a racist? and (2) Which button would you push? [Editor’s Note: referring to a couple of the thought exercises that I posed to them. No one engaged any of these thought exercises publicly. However, I hope they did in their own minds.]


– x  (back to Note 2 introduction)

Note 3: Kwamla presents me with an opportunity to present some core values.

Kwamla said:

xPraetorius (quoting me):

This is the infamous, long debunked “Conservatives are Stupid (therefore racist)” study. Three quick points: (1) to latch onto a fraudulent, long-discredited study shows a tendency to latch onto the first indication of something that agrees with one’s point of view.This is an example of something you seem to do quite a lot xPraetorius. You issue a denial and rebuttal but then don’t even bother to provide any other source other than your own words. So can you provide any external evidence for your claims that this has been debunked? And by whom?

I have my own definition on racism (white supremacy – as you know). It does not support this false and misleading view that anyone, Black or white etc…, can be racist. [Editor’s Note: I addressed this below. Kwamla is trying here to advance the idea that blacks can’t experience the full range of human feelings and emotions — both good and bad. A better example of a racial supremacist belief would be difficult to find.] You can find my explanation in full here:


Also, for someone who has a already admitted to not knowing who “Tim Wise” is or even looked at the video I provided for you on his definition of “Whiteness” and “white privilege”. Entering into any discourse about the merits of what Dr. Llaila Afrika writes about, at this or any other stage, would be pointless and futile if you are claiming an inability to grasp any of these two important concepts. I can assure you these two ideas are essential to understanding racism otherwise you will continue to express, as you indeed already have main times, profound ignorance about its well documented structure.

By all means disagree with what people say but to insist that they rely simply on your own words for this is not SERIOUS debate is it?

xPraetorius’ reply:

@Kwamla: First my apologies for the incompleteness with this post. I wrote up a long one using the edit box on Abagond’s blog, hit “Post” and it disappeared into cyber-nothingness. I knew that I was supposed to write in Notepad and copy-paste into the edit box, but forgot to! Youch!

Anyway, I’ll try to reproduce what I had written before.

First: regarding the study, it was a news story a few months ago. Someone, I forget who, had the premise that “Conservatives are stupid.” He decided that was a tough sell, so he worked back from that premise to find people who believed the same, quizzed them and produced his study. I forget what the tactic of working backward from the conclusion is called, but it’s a common tactic with people who aren’t really interested in the truth, but rather in validating their pre-conceived notions.

Second: I watched Dr, Llaila Afrika at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kdb_q13aFuc. I watched about 50 minutes of it.

It’s an hour-long diatribe that struck me as both extremely clever and really stupid at the same time. It was a wonderful example of saying just a whole bunch of really stupid stuff, really well and fluently. What does one say about someone who does and says something really stupid really well? Easy: plainly he’s very intelligent, but is choosing to embrace stupidity. Again, I’m prepared to hear that the video I watched no longer is indicative of what Dr. Afrika thinks. If that’s true, can you point me to something more current?

Third: You said: “I can assure you these two ideas are essential to understanding racism.” My Reply: Yes. Essential to understanding how you understand racism. We’ve already determined that you and I disagree as to the definition of racism. Mine is: “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” You disagree. There’s no point in talking about anything unless we can agree on what we’re talking about.

Fourth: I read the post at the link in Abagond’s blog. I also read your comment. The post adds perspective to Abagond’s thinking, but, like you, I still disagree. Abagond’s writing, so, likely his thinking too, has a fatal flaw. It’s in the title of his post: “All Blacks Are Racist.” First off, that means that he himself is racist. If, as Abagond insists, he’s a racist, then all his thinking and writing are tainted by that racism. It throws everything he writes into question. Worse, in making that statement Abagond asserts that he has an in-depth view into the thinking of all blacks. Furthermore, he’s saying that in the realm of race, all blacks think and feel alike! Really? Freakin’ really?!? How on earth can anyone think that a statement like that could ever be legitimate?!?

A major accusation against racist white people is: they think all blacks are [fill in whatever here]. The follow-up legitimate question is: How can any nitwit possibly think that all blacks think, or feel, or reason alike?!? Only a neanderthal racist could think that! I think this confirms that I have a higher regard for black people than Abagond! Why? Simple: Not all black people are racist, as Abagond has written.

As to your comment: I disagree as well. You say that if whites are busy oppressing blacks through racism, then blacks can’t possibly be racists in response. You then offer the completely ludicrous idea that 95% of whites oppress blacks. This is outlandish and silly. Obviously you and I are going to have to disagree on that one. However, your basic premise is incorrect as well. A white person can be racist toward a black person who is equally racist toward him. Simple as that. Racism is a state of mind. To deny that black people can have a certain state of mind is to deny black people their humanity. They are capable of having exactly, the same states of mind as white people because they’re really people who also happen to be black. It appears that I have a higher opinion of black people than you do as well, Kwamla!

As to Tim Wise: We can play dueling videos, dueling links, dueling studies and dueling experts all day. For every one of these things or people you find, I can find one too. That kind of thing just tends not to be fruitful, so I try not to do it. For every Tim Wise there’s a Jason Riley, or a Charles Payne, or a Thomas Sowell, and on and on and on and on…if you wish to think that Mr. Wise is the definitive source for all learning in terms of race, okay, but I’d say that’s silly on the face of it. Race and race relations are vastly too complex for one person to have figured it all out. One can make global statements that are valid, but one then needs to produce lots and lots of global-scope evidence — not single sources or personal anecdotes — to support the statement.

I made my global statement — white racism is not a big problem in America today — and buttressed it with all sorts of evidence and statements and thought exercises and the like. My narrative met only derision, peremptory dismissal, scurrilous accusations and insults. The response from Abagond World was unworthy of an important topic. At least you have made a sincere attempt to provide support, but you added in your own insults and racial slurs as well!

Look, I could be right or wrong, but the irrational, emotional response from most people here weighed heavily in favor of what I was saying. After all, if I were wrong, surely there would be evidence of thousands of black-on-white racial incidents daily. After all, we’re a country of more than 300 million! Surely not all the media are hiding all these incidents! No, the media hunger for white-on-black racial incidents! If they were out there, you can be sure you and I would hear about it.


– x (back to Note 3 introduction)

Note 4: In which I miss a couple of opportunities to show how BrothaWolf pretty much conceded a lot of what I’d been saying right along!

Brothawolf said:

(quoting) resw77 There’s nothing wrong with opinions–everyone has them–but passing them off as facts in xpraetorius’ manner shows dishonesty and indolence.

BW’s reply: This is the whole point of it all. Everyone has opinions just like everyone has different views. There are also such a things as different truths. There’s more than one perspective to the world.

And too many times, the perspective of black people are always shunned, laughed at or lashed upon. It’s no different than telling others that what they think doesn’t matter. There clearly is no intellectual or moral reasoning behind such thinking.

xPraetorius’ reply:

At last, BW! A little sense! I take this as your admitting that I’m not a racist, and that at the worst I have a “different truth” and another perspective. We’re moving forward! [Editor’s Note: So, I did address it, but weakly, in my humble opinion. I SHOULD have jumped all over this as a complete capitulation to my point-of-view.]

Since, as you say, I have a different truth, then I suspect this is your indirect way of apologizing for calling me a racist, a liar and all those other awful things you called me, when all along I simply was saying different truths.

I accept your apology. [Editor’s Note: I DID give them the needle a bit here… ]

Since I recognize that you believe in “different truths,” that makes your apology valid, and my melanin is not detecting any insincerity or deceitfulness. […and here]

However, I’m not a big believer in “different truths.” Different perspectives, yes. Different truths, no.

Therefore, I continue to maintain that white racism is no longer a big problem in America today. Since, in your mind this is only a “different truth,” you can’t argue that a truth does not not spring from intellectual or moral reasoning. Obviously a “truth” can spring only from correct reasoning.

Ok, after that fun little exercise, let’s get serious again. Sorry, I don’t believe that the Nazis or the Communists simply had a “different truth.” These scumbags were possessed of a Very Big Lie.  [Editor’s Note: I didn’t even once address BW’s phrase — “It’s no different than telling others that what they think doesn’t matter. There clearly is no intellectual or moral reasoning behind such thinking.” — which clearly indicts the vast majority of Abagond’s commenters. Very frustrating, in retrospect.]


– x  (back to Note 4 introduction)

Note 5: In which Sharina admits Obama was elected because of the color of his skin.

Sharina said:

I do not wish to offend anyone in this statement and I apologize if I do, but having a black president tells me that democrats were smart enough to realize how to monopolize on black votes. [Editor’s Note: The only flaw in Sharina’s argument: Democrats have monopolized Black votes for a very long time.] I do believe the republicans attempted it with Herman Caine, but I think he got hip on to his puppet status. The excuse he gave for leaving was just ridiculous. [Editor’s Note: This is some of the most moronic analysis ever!]

xPraetorius’ reply:

The first part is correct, as far as it goes. The calculations were as tad more complex than that on the part of the Democrat Party, but sharina’s point is correct: Barack Obama is President today because of the color of his skin, not despite it. (A point, by the way, that Geraldine Ferraro made quite clearly during the 2008 primary campaign(*).) The part about Herman Cain is incorrect.

Sharina’s point ought to be all this crowd should need to confirm my assertion that “white racism is no longer a big problem in America today.” A vastly more serious problem is the obvious fact that the Democrat Party thought that electing a black President was more important that electing a good President.


– x

(*) Ferraro said: “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.” [Editor’s Note: a rare moment of on-the-button candor from a prominent Democrat! Of course, her agenda was to advance the candidate of Hillary Clinton at the time, but she was right in what she said. More importantly, the only reason she said it was to help advance the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Does anyone really doubt that if Clinton had not been running, Ferraro would not have said this?] (back to Note 5 introduction)


One thought on “Wading Into The Race Grievance Industry – Findings (Part VIII)

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