White Supremacy? Just Another Leftist Fabrication


Want proof? Okay: First define it for me. Next: go find me some and show it to me.

Go ahead… I’ll wait.

Found some? Not yet! Shouldn’t it be all over the place?!? I mean, this isracist, and a white supremacist nation, right? Right? You do know what “supreme” means, right? Please tell me you know what the word means! Here you are running around calling white people, and particularly white Conservatives, white supremacists, so surely you know what the word means!

Remember: the accusation is that America is a racist nation, and a white supremacist nation. According to that, you’d better be able to find me thousands of examples, hundreds of thousands of examples. Everywhere.

Oh, you’ll point me to Charlottesville, surely. But, they couldn’t even pull off a rally there without being beaten down, except for one lone whack-job who drove a car into a bunch of violent counter-protesters.

There hasn’t been a “white supremacist” rally since then. But after Charlottesville there were millions of virtue signalling injuries all across the land as countless people sprained their tongues frenziedly tsk-tsking and tut-tutting.

Oh, there’ve been attempts to hold “Free Speech” rallies… rallies whose organizers explicitly denounced anything that had to do with “white supremacy,” whatever that finally turns out to be. Those rallies — in favor of free speech! in America!… fizzled.

Rallying for free speech in America ought to be like rallying in favor of the Red Sox in Boston.

But as soon as the Left, and their puppets in the media, whispered “White Supremacy” in the same context as free speech, out came the antifa goons, and the rallies never even happened.

No, today’s accusations of “White Supremacy” are really coming from a bunch of Left Supremacists, to coin a term.

Want more proof? Go ahead and point to a prominent Conservative politician or commentator who’s made a speech on a major college campus in recent days. See whether you can find Ann Coulter, or Charles Murray, or Ben Shapiro or Milo Yiannopoulos and ask them.

After you’ve spoken with them, then go find me a left-wing commentator or politician who’s been shouted down by a right-wing mob somewhere in America. I’d tell you to go ahead, and that I’ll wait, but I’ll be waiting a very long time.

And whom have the furious denunciations of “White Supremacy” most benefited? Non-white people? They could use some real benefit in America. The Left has them so far under the heel of their jack boots they could use some relief! But, no, the antifa goons and their brainless followers in the media haven’t done anything for non-white people. But they’ve sure made the Left happy! Morons like Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the others all running around with bandages on their tongues, but feeling as though they really got us Conservatives on the defensive with the fabricated charge of “White Supremacy.”(1)

I re-state my original challenge: If you believe that there’s really any such thing as “White Supremacy,” and if you want to accuse us Conservatives of being guilty of it, then the burden to define it is on your shoulders. Furthermore, the burden to point to specific examples of it is also on your shoulders. If you can’t point to hundreds of thousands of specific examples of it, then you’re a fraud. And “White Supremacy” is  a fabrication.

You are aware, aren’t you, that the notion of “supreme” is contained in the word “Supremacy?” That when you say “White Supremacy” you’re using a noun — “Supremacy” — modified by an adjective — “White” — that implies that white people in some way hold a position of obvious, demonstrable power over non-white people. Go ahead find me some of those millions of concrete examples of something resembling that. They must be out there for you to make such a lurid, horrid accusation against tens of millions of people.

I’ll help you: if there even is such a thing as “White Supremacy,” and if it exists in profusion in America, as the Left accuses, then you should be able to point me to countless laws — federal, state and local — a well as thousands of policies, procedures, rules and regulations, all of which obviously favor… white people.

Furthermore, you should be able to point me to countless examples of the same things, explicitly and obviously, disfavoring non-white people. You know, things like literacy tests and the like(2). There should be so many of them that one could comfortably use the concept of “supreme” in referring to white people in America.

Here’s one final hint for you leftists out hunting around for specific examples of “White Supremacy” to rub in my face: You can find it right over there with the unicorns.

Go ahead, I’ll wait.

— xPraetorius

Notes:


(1) Don’t forget: there was a notion of “White Supremacy” in America. Its inventor and most stalwart defender was… none other than the  Democrat Party! After the Civil War, they brought about things like the Jim Crow Laws in the South, segregation, and, oh yeah, the Ku Klux Klan.

(2) What? Outlawed many decades ago!?! How can that be, in a “racist” and “white supremacist” nation?

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “White Supremacy? Just Another Leftist Fabrication

    1. Hi, BW! Well, I read the piece at the other end of your link, and it merely proves all my points for me. Let’s take a brief look at it.


      (1) First: The author, one Otamere Guobadia is barely literate.

      (2) The author is very poorly educated. What he says in his essay is untrue on the face of it, meaning that I don’t even have to do any research to prove its falseness; I need merely to point it out, which I’ll do below.

      (3) Here’s some more that we learn about Mr. Guobadia: “Otamere Guobadia is a law finalist at University College, Oxford. Activist, former editor of Oxford based queer and trans publication, No HeterOx and President of the Oxford University LGBTQ society.”

      Well there’s a source you can be sure is solid! 🙂

      BW: you and I have gone back and forth on things like this. Guobadia’s essay is surely a legit-appearing thing, but it’s obviously not legit.

      Now, let’s look at some of the actual facts of Guobadia’s opinion piece for a moment.

      Fact: Even if we accept the entire premise of Guobadia’s piece, it’s all anecdotal. There’s no way you can go from the interaction of one person and one company to a general statement on an entire country. Sorry, that’s simply true. If you could, then of course, this country is racist… against white people. There are millions of exhaustively documented current examples of actual, real discrimination against white people in employment, housing, university admissions, publication, the media, pop culture, and so forth.

      I’m a black person with lots of white friends. I’ve spoken, in depth, with lots of them, and never once has one of them complained about the hundreds of examples of anti-white discrimination — that was also explicitly pro-black discrimination — that they’ve experienced.

      Don’t even talk to me about the massive discrimination against Asians in America! That discrimination also takes the form of pro-black discrimination in American universities. Everyone’s trying to be sure that they don’t upset us sensitive black people! (<– my opinion. 🙂 But, an opinion amply supported by facts.)

      Fact: “Munroe Bergdorf” is really a dude named Ian. That he says he’s a woman simply doesn’t make it so; no matter how much anyone wants to believe it.

      Camille Paglia — gay, leftist feminist — and an actual respected social scientist says there’s simply no such thing as a “transgender” person.

      Fact: Much of what Guobadia insists is “fact” in is essay is mere opinion, unsupported by anything except the author’s insistence that it’s fact. Some examples? Sure:

      Example 1: Guobadia says: “But the fact remains that Munroe’s [Ian’s] statements were not and did not constitute a racist “rant.”

      My response: This is an opinion. To say that a statement like, “All [fill in race here] are [fill in accusation here]” is “racist” is hardly unreasonable. To suggest that such a statement is not racist is a much harder thing to prove.

      Example 2: “To suggest that all white people, and all people in general regardless of gender or creed, internalise the oppressive rhetoric and paradigms that dominate our society should be taken as a given.”

      My response: This is an opinion. The fact is that science takes no opinions as “givens.” To suggest further that the positively weird notion that a generalization covering an entire race ought “to be taken as a given” is, of course, ludicrous.

      Example 3: Guobadia says: “We are socialised under white supremacy and patriarchy from birth. What she said is factual.”

      My response: This is an opinion. Goubadia’s opinion is that Ian’s opinion is fact. It’s not. No opinion is ever a “fact.”

      Example 3: Guobadia continues in the same paragraph: “Individual exceptionalism cannot absolve you of complicity in racist systems that function on a widespread structural level, one that requires the complicity of all the people that benefit from the system, and even in some ways minorities who do not.”

      My response: More opinion. It’s an equally valid opinion to say that “Individual exceptionalism disproves the notion of “White Supremacy,” which it quite neatly does.

      It’s my opinion that the fact that the most powerful man in the world for eight years was Barack Obama, a black man, strongly supports the conclusion that in America there’s simply no such thing as White Supremacy. In a racist, White Supremacist country there simply would be no possibility of a “President Obama.” Go ahead and prove that wrong.

      I’d continue on, but every paragraph in the Guobadia’s piece is overflowing with such ignorant sloppiness, leading me to point something out: This guy, Guobadia, is a “law finalist” in Great Britain. He’s going to be a barrister! A dude tasked with… making arguments in front of learned people! We need to hope that he’s never a litigator, because any of his clients would be doomed to lose their case. If this guy were to be on the stand in a court of law in America, where the defendant would be, say, “White Supremacy,” each statement in his rant would be thrown out as hearsay, speculation, or mere uncorroborated poppycock.

      BW: I’ve suggested many times that you and I avoid the dueling sources silliness. It never gets anyone anywhere. This Otamere Guobadia guy’s essay is easy to reject as plainly uninformed, and as having assimilated into his noggin a bunch of political dogma as “facts.” This is too bad. He seems like a nice enough guy, but his worldview is ill-formed, ignorant, and, apparently, driven only by what he wishes were true.

      If you disagree with me, consider this: If I were to point you to a writer for National Review as a source, what do you think is the very first thing you’d do? You and I both know you’d immediately say, “Well, he writes for National Review. That’s a right-wing publication!” You’d do that because that would allow you, in your mind, to discredit — from the get-go — whatever point I was trying to make. That’s why playing dueling sources is a ridiculous thing to do. Let’s both take as an actual given the fact that I can find a bunch of “sources” to back up my arguments, just as you can find a bunch to support yours, and leave it at that.

      I’m interested in original thinking and argumentation from you.

      So, you’ve pointed me to an anecdote about the interaction between one person, Ian, and the company that used to employ him. I’m sorry, but you just can’t get to any notion of “White Supremacy” from that single incident. Are you telling me that no so-called “transgender person” can ever be fired from his job for any reason whatsoever?

      Now, I’m about to concede something to you: The sub-head to Goubadia’s piece is right on the nose. What Guobadia says here is an absolutely perfect summation of the mindset of western corporations:

      They wanted Munroe’s transness, her blackness, her womanhood and all of the glory and the capital gain of her ‘diversity’ with none of the corollary activism and resistance that comes with her identity

      Yep.

      American, and western, corporations — especially fashion industry corporations — want desperately to be seen as “forward-thinking”, “edgy,” “progressive,” “avant-garde.” So they purchase that image by hiring people like Ian. However, as Guobadia implies, it’s not in support of some abstract notion of “diversity,” but to contribute to the company’s profits. He’s absolutely right. That is, after all, what the company is in business to do in the first place! So, in hiring Ian, L’Oreal absolutely hoped to buy some cred with their target audience: young, generally wealthy, generally leftist people who might purchase their products.

      That’s it. Why would anyone be surprised about this?

      Furthermore, L’Oreal absolutely hired Ian with the hope that he wasn’t going to go public with rants that sure seemed racist! L’Oreal is like any other company, organization, group, association, club in the world: They don’t want any controversy that might reflect poorly on them.

      When Ian launched his little rant, he implied that a massive part of L’Oreal’s customer base are either evil themselves, or complicit in evil. I can tell you that anyone in the world who sets about to insult the customers of the company where he works shouldn’t expect to remain employed there for long.

      Guopbadia’s piece takes an act of charity — L’Oreal giving a dude a job to act and dress up like a woman — and tries to dress it up as something noble. Then, he opines that the withdrawal of that extraordinary act of charity, when the man in question makes a boneheaded, racist statement (yep, my opinion), is some deeper, nationwide offense against non-white people. It is a statement about the idiocy of hiring people based on skin color, sexual preference, or mental idiosyncrasy, rather than on their merits as potential employees.

      It’s as if white people were to transfer trillions of dollars over to poor black people, and then when someone suggests that they should stop doing that, it’s somehow racist. Oops. That happens all the time.

      It’s as if I were to give you a new car every year, and then to stop. However, rather than simply being grateful for all the previous new cars, you then call me a jerk and a racist because I stopped giving you the new cars.

      “Munroe Bergdorf” is a dude named Ian making an apparently pretty good living persuading others that he’s a woman. He has nothing to complain about. Some of us have to work for a living.

      Best,

      — x

  1. You said that white people have faced numerous examples of anti-white racism. Yet, you haven’t provided any proof to that statement. I can’t simply take your word for it without any documentation that I can read for myself.

    But on the other hand, I can show you reported examples of white supremacy from those who actually did research:

    http://www.epi.org/publication/black-white-wage-gaps-expand-with-rising-wage-inequality/
    https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-school-funding-and-the-role-of-race/408085/
    https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/UnequalEduation.pdf
    http://www.epi.org/publication/black-unemployment-educational-attainment/

    Yet, as long as I’ve known you, you will reject each and every one with little or no proof to hold up your rejection. So, why is it that any article, data or study that points to white supremacy and racism against black people is bogus but you can say that anti-white racism is real and provide nothing to show for it?

    You said, “I’ve suggested many times that you and I avoid the dueling sources silliness.” So, how am I or anyone supposed to believe you when you say, “There are millions of exhaustively documented current examples of actual, real discrimination against white people in employment, housing, university admissions, publication, the media, pop culture, and so forth.” You call that a fact, but you haven’t provided one example from anywhere.

    You said, “If I were to point you to a writer for National Review as a source, what do you think is the very first thing you’d do? You and I both know you’d immediately say, “Well, he writes for National Review. That’s a right-wing publication!” You’d do that because that would allow you, in your mind, to discredit — from the get-go — whatever point I was trying to make.” But isn’t that what you do when someone who disagrees present their sources?

    Why are you trying to hard to say that there’s no such thing as white supremacy or white racism in this land? You seem to want to avoid it and proclaim that they don’t exist. And those who do, you accuse them as being part of the so-called “race grievance industry”. Yet, you bring up how white people are being oppressed and provide no examples to support that.

    I’ve said this before. Why not ask or talk to black people what they think instead of telling them what they should think. Black people are not a monolith. We don’t have a hive mind and we’re not lost children. We simply want to be given the same love and respect as white people since we live in a white dominated nation. I don’t see why you think that’s a problem. We’re not out to oppress white people. We’re not into white genocide as some members of the alt-right believe. We just want fairness, appreciation, respect and dignity. We just want to be seen as people and not as a problem, a threat or inferior. In general, we mean you no harm, especially when we discuss and talk about how anti-black racism affects our lives. We’re not trying to take over and we’re not out to make you feel guilty about anything. We simply just want to live.

    Why is that so wrong for us to want to be heard? Do we deserve to be told that we’re making our problems up, that our problems are silly, to have our testimonies and the research done by professionals rejected?

    Honestly, and I’m not being mean, is this whole thing about your strong seemingly unbreakable stance for conservatism really about racism against whites, particularly against straight, white Christian males, or is this really about you?

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s