White Supremacy? There’s No Such Thing.


In several exchanges I had with members of the Race Grievance Industry, I gave them ample opportunity to tell me just what that is. In a country supposedly overrun with it, you’d think that someone could tell me, just simply, what it is.

What’s “it?” Oh: “White Supremacy.”

One thing became amply clear in all my exchanges: All the ones whining about white supremacy — white, brown, black or other — have no idea what it is they’re whining about.

Numerous times I challenged interlocutors on this and other blogs to define “white supremacy” for me. I’d held out from doing the obvious: Googling it. I held out, because I wanted to give those with whom I was interacting plenty of chances to Google it themselves.

Why? Easy: they plainly had no idea what it is, and therefore couldn’t tell me — supposedly a practitioner of it, supposedly one of the ones vicitimizing my non-white debate participants with it — what it is. I begged them to tell me. I taunted them in an attempt to goad them to tell me. I asked nicely, sarcastically, cajolingly, in high dugdgeon, indignantly, politely, rudely… you name the mood, I exhibited it! No one ever told me.

So, now I’m going to Google it. Presumably I’ll find a Wikipedia entry, and I’ll probably use that as my starting point. Here goes. (Googling, googling, googling, googling…)

Found something! Here’s what I found:

As suspected, the very top result on the Google SERP (Search Engine Results Page) was from Wikipedia, so let’s go with that, and then see what we can find out from it.

Here’s the Wikipedia entry:

White supremacy or white supremacism is a racist ideology based upon the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore white people should be dominant over other races. White supremacy has roots in scientific racism and it often relies on pseudoscientific arguments. Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose people of color, Jews, and non-Protestants.

The term is also typically used to describe a political ideology that perpetuates and maintains the socialpoliticalhistorical or institutional domination by white people (as evidenced by historical and contemporary sociopolitical structures such as the Atlantic slave tradeJim Crow laws in the United States, and apartheidin South Africa).[1] Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different forms of white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.

In academic usage, particularly in usage which draws on the critical race theory, the term “white supremacy” can also refer to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual level.

Well. There’s quite a bit here. First reaction? There’s some credible stuff to which to react, and I think that after having duked it out with the Race Grievance Industry for several years now, we should scrutinize this with attentive respect. So, let’s do that.

We’ll do that piece-by-piece, and for each piece we’ll examine it in the context of our country today.


First, from Wikipedia:

  • White supremacy or white supremacism is a racist ideology based upon the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore white people should be dominant over other races.”

Hmmmm… Wikipedia had to introduce another, rarely-used, term: “white supremacism.” This term, this “ism,” allows Wikipedia’s definition to be possible. An ideology can’t be a status, and “supremacy” is a noun that speaks of a status.

An ideology, though, is a set of beliefs, and Wikipedia has defined “White Supremacy” as a belief system. A belief system that presumably(1) leads to bad acts against non-white people. That’s how I’ve understood it as well in all my interactions with the pawns of the Race Grievance Industry.

So, let’s say that we accept Wikipedia’s premise. With the reservations that their imprecise language makes inevitable… and troubling. In this case — in the case of something as abstract as a set of beliefs — the language used to describe those beliefs should be as precise as possible.


Next, from Wikipedia:

  • White supremacy has roots in scientific racism and it often relies on pseudoscientific arguments. Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose people of color, Jews, and non-Protestants.

This passage is particularly weak. The author of the passage is trying, poorly, to give some background on so-called “White Supremacy.”

Following the link on “scientific racism,” we arrive at another Wikipedia article with some serious flaws. One such flaw: it pretends that a claim that the classic 1994 study of race and IQ, The Bell Curve, “postulates racist conclusions” is credible. There are no “racist conclusions” in The Bell Curve. I know, I read it. I’m figuring that the one who wrote that ignorant passage had never read the book. The laziness of the author(s) of the Wikipedia entry is a blow to the credibility of the notion of “white supremacy” itself.

So, we now have our first doubts as to Wikipedia’s definition of “White Supremacy.” If it was written by a member of the Race Grievance Industry, then that would be a serious blow to its credibility, as there would be no hope of objectivity in it.

The passage says further that “white supremacy,” or “white supremacism” relies on “pseudoscientific arguments.” I’ll go along with that! All irrational belief systems do this. This is one of the major flaws of things like Communism and Fascism, which are simply different names for the same thing: “Socialism.”

Socialists are constantly professing their love for “science,” and are constantly duped by the most egregious pseudoscientific codswallop, like environmentalism, Lysenkoism and Eugenics.

The passage continues: “Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose people of color, Jews, and non-Protestants.” Yuck. Awkward phrase, poorly thought out. What does “oppose people of color” mean? “Oppose?” How? Where? In a volleyball game? Again, we have to infer a whole bunch because of the at best sloppy language.(2)

So, let’s infer. I guess that the author of the passage means that white supremacists simply don’t like non-white people. I have to guess, but that’s what “oppose” must mean. I guess that’s a reasonable interpretation.

Now, however, let’s look at that conclusion of the passage: is there any evidence that white Americans don’t like non-white Americans? Well, not really. If there were, and if there were real, actual hostility toward non-white people by white people, the largest demographic in America, who are allegedly “supreme,” then surely you could find laws, rules, processes, procedures, regulations, practices… that simply disfavor non-white people. There aren’t any. Not one. In fact, such rules, laws, practices, etc., are explicitly illegal, and if you engage in them you will pay a big fine, lose your job, maybe lose your family, maybe go to jail. You won’t get away with it, and everyone in America knows it.


Next from Wikipedia:

  • The term [Editor’s Note: “White Supremacy”] is also typically used to describe a political ideology that perpetuates and maintains the social, political, historical or institutional domination by white people (as evidenced by historical and contemporary sociopolitical structures such as the Atlantic slave trade, Jim Crow laws in the United States, and apartheid in South Africa). Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different forms of white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.

Mildly interesting from a historical perspective, but not relevant to today’s America. The passage unintentionally proves that there’s no White Supremacy in America. After all, if there were, then presumably we white people would have “perpetuated and maintained the social, political, historical or institutional domination by white people.”

The Atlantic slave trade was abolished more than a century and a half ago; Jim Crow laws were abolished more than half a century ago; South African apartheid was abolished more than twenty years ago. Presumably if white people were “supreme” in America, then they (we) would have been able to hold back some of the steady, more than century-long dismantling of these institutions. Some “supreme” race! But they (we) could be! After all, white people are still by very far, the largest demographic in America… I guess they (we) just don’t want to.

But, but, but… the people howling about “white supremacy” claim that we whites all have it. That all white people like me are constantly working and struggling to maintain our “supremacy.” Well, if that were true, then we’d… ummm… do it. We’d just do it, and there’d be no debate about it, because we’re more numerous by far than all other groups. Oh, that won’t be true forever, but all that means is that we’d best hustle our bustle, and restore the slave trade, and the KKK and the Jim Crow laws and segregation and all that, right? Oh, I guess we don’t want to. Well, if we don’t want to then we can’t have anything like “white supremacy” floating around in our noggins, or in the American air.

From the same passage: “Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different forms of white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.” Wait, wait… we so-called “white supremacists” can’t even agree on who’s white and who’s not?!?

I wonder how that could be! Well, the answer to that is easy… there are white supremacists out and about. A few dozen maybe. And no one in any position whatsoever takes them seriously, considers their views legitimate, thinks they’re anyone that anyone else needs to pay attention to.

Finally, though, we get something from Wikipedia (below) that we can deal with.


Lastly from Wikipedia:

  • In academic usage, particularly in usage which draws on the critical race theory, the term “white supremacy” can also refer to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual level.

Finally! Something we can work with! And something that’s not mired in the distant past!

“In academic usage…” Interesting phrase. Probably not a good one though for any case that there’s anything like “white supremacy” around. Academics, after all, are not well-known for their close attachment to reality.

And, we find out from Wikipedia that the notion of “white supremacy” comes from “critical race theory!” Critical race theory is essentially the black version of white “scientific racism.” It’s a bunch of racist, pseudo-scientific flapdoodle that engages in the very thinking it purports to condemn. One can use Wikipedia’s own words to describe critical race theory: Critical race theory “is a racist ideology based upon the belief that non-white people are superior in many ways to white people and that therefore non-white people should be dominant over white people.

Lastly, the passage says: “‘white supremacy’ can also refer to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual level.”

Okay. Let’s see some of that. Some of that “structural advantage (privilege)” that white people have in America. Again, if this last passage were true, then what we said above — about all the laws, rules, regulations, policies, procedures and practices — should be easy to find, to prove that there’s something out there that could reasonably be called “white supremacy.”

I believe that the the last three words are correct. There are isolated instances where a white person gains some kind of unfair advantage over a non-white person in the area of hiring, or promoting, or school, or… something.

Those acts are illegal. If the person who commits that discrimination is caught, he can count on losing his job at the very least. I should point out that the reverse is not true. Discrimination against white people — in the form of preferences for non-white people — again in the areas of hiring, promotion, school or whatever — is rampant in America. And you can get away with that without a problem.(3)

Sorry, Race Grievance Industry, there’s, obviously, no white supremacy in America.

— xPraetorius

Notes:


(1) I say “presumably,” because no one from the RGI proved able even to tell me what it is, so I’ve had to interpret a bunch. In saying this, I haven’t been unreasonable. For instance, I conclude that the RGI don’t like it. I don’t think this is an unreasonable conclusion.

(2) We also have to ignore the nonsense phrase, “people of color.” By scientific definition, white people have more “color” in their skin, than people with darker skin. White light has, literally, all the colors of the rainbow in it. Do a little thought exercise with me: What happens in a windowless room when you turn out the light (the white light, btw)? What “color” do you see when you remove all color? Yep. You see no color, and that’s black.

(3) Anecdotally, I’ve lost employment because I’m white. Other employment because I’m a man. I was denied a mortgage because I’m white. The loan officer, a friend of mine, even told me afterward that the mortgage company “needed more white loan denials.” I once had the hiring manager at a prospective employer tell me flat out that “if I could be gay, that would help my case.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

17 thoughts on “White Supremacy? There’s No Such Thing.

    1. Lol! I’m going to answer this only once, BW. Just once. Because I’ve already answered it so many other times:

      • There’s no such thing as “White Supremacy.”
      • There is racism against black Americans out there. It’s just not a big problem in America.
      • There is open racism against white Americans out there, but it’s not a big problem for them either.
      • Anti-white racism, while not a big problem for white Americans, is a bigger problem for whites, than anti-black racism is for black people.

      I’ve said those things — and pretty well proven them — many times before. So, to do us both a favor, I won’t answer any questions of yours that you’ve already asked, that make allegations that are patently untrue.

      Best,

      — x

    2. Oh, sorry… one more thing. I’ve stated directly to you — probably dozens of times — that there is anti-black racism in America.

      Your question is akin to my asking you something like, “Why do you beat your dog?” after you’ve denied beating your dog many times already.

      To do us both a favor, I’ll respond to such questions only with something that indicates that your question is ridiculous, because it presupposes something that’s simply not true.

      Best,

      — x

  1. Correct.

    I’ve already answered this numerous times. For every link you produce, I can produce an equally compelling, equally authoritative, equally serious, equally credible source or link coming to exactly the opposite conclusion. That’s why I don’t play dueling links.

    Best,

    — x

    1. Oh course.

      All it shows it that even though you’ll bark for proof of racism against blacks people, no matter what is presented to you is never good enough or worthy of your attention. Blog posts, news articles, data, charts, statistics, reports, academic research, anything will never convince you not because they’re not true, it’s because you DON’T WANT it to be true.

      1. Lol! Needless to say, you didn’t address the point I made.

        You and I could go back and forth, arguing what’s already been argued before by far too many other people who never resolved anything either.

        That’s why I use a different approach, looking at things other than studies, and reports, and links, and web sites — all of which can be, and routinely are, tainted by the producers’ biases.

        And, of course, it should go without saying that I also can produce, as you say, “Blog posts, news articles, data, charts, statistics, reports, academic research, anything” that are all true, that all support my point-of-view, that will never convince you.

        All that would be pointless and a stupid exercise in frustration for both of us. To prove that, I did produce an opinion piece that was also full of facts, and you immediately rejected it because it came from… National Review.

        The links you presented were all from places with a bias too. Your point? You get to use biased sources, but I don’t? Sorry… no.

        All that is why I look at other things like:
        • Where are people trying to get to?
        • Where are they trying to get out of?
        • Are there things that contradict “conventional wisdom?”
        • And, if so, what plausible explanations are there for these things?
        • Are there other ways to look at things that might be instructive?
        • Does this or that argument hold up

        I’ve read all the studies that go against what I believe. I’ve listened to hundreds and hundreds of hours of commentary that contradicts what I believe. That’s easy for me. I’m a Conservative who spends a lot of time in a left-wing state, in an increasingly left-wing country, overrun by a largely left-wing media/pop culture/academia complex. I can and do find opposing viewpoints just by reaching over and turning on the television.

        You on the other hand, have to work to find serious Conservative viewpoints. You plainly do not do that work. If you did, you’d know that, for example, there were more white, European slaves in Africa than there were black slaves in America. Well! Surprise! You never knew that.

        If you did have an informed point of view, you might have an answer to the question: If America is so racist toward non-whites, why are non-whites flocking to come here by the tens of millions?

        You could at least have offered the notion that America is still a racist country, just less racist than the others. That, at least, could have been a somewhat serious argument. I’d have beaten it back, but it would have been more difficult to address than your constant silly anecdotes, and your whining about how you don’t like how I present my arguments.

        The real problem was: you never even thought to address my arguments, but rather obsessed over what a bad person you thought I am.

        And you never divested yourself of your beloved strawmen, like insisting that I deny that racism exists… despite my literally dozens of unambiguously-worded declarations that anti-black racism still exists. (<– there's another one.)… but it’s not a big problem in America today.

        All this taken together demonstrated that you’re not serious about your anti-racism. You want to have your own racism, to which you’ve honestly admitted, but you’ve never wanted to face what is an increasingly apparent truth: There’s just not a lot of animosity coming from white people toward black people in America today. Oh, it’s there (<– there's another one) alright, but it's not a big problem today. Not even remotely as big as the other pathologies afflicting black Americans… one of which is their own racism.

        The conventional wisdom of today is all on your side. Just as the conventional wisdom of yesterday was that the earth was flat. That was wrong too.

        You race addicts in the Race Grievance Industry are the flat-earthers of today: militantly opposed to seeing what’s right in front of your faces. And you use all the tactics I’ve always called you out on to avoid seeing what’s in front of your faces: the insults, avoidance, strawmen, circular arguments, complaints about rudeness, irrelevant and false accusations, mind-reading, character assassination… all to avoid the debating the actual point.

        Because you have no real arguments.

        There. I’ve given you another detailed response that you didn’t deserve. You’re welcome.

        I admit… sometimes I can’t help it. I’m fond of you, and that clouds my better judgement, when I should just tell you to get lost, and take your hyper-superficial arguments with you. 🙂

        Best,

        — x

        1. Let’s set some things straight.

          I never obsessed over what a bad person I THINK you are. You made it a necessity to respond as if you’re barely out of the sixth grade.

          I NEVER, NOT ONCE said that you thought that anti-racism doesn’t exist. I repeated what you said in my arguments.

          Let’s not forget who came to whom’s blog first. Let me remind you that it was YOU who came to MY blog with YOUR crap. And that’s what set everything off. Something I said touched a nerve with you. That’s why you felt the need to condemn a blog post that had nothing to do with you.

          My blog is dedicated to helping in the discussion of racism and in a way fight it with words. Apparently, the subject of anti-black racism is a problem with you, and I suspect it’s because you THINK AND WANT IT to not be a significant issue.

          1. Let’s set some things straight.

            —————————————————-
            Reply:
            Okay, but I doubt you’ll set anything straight.
            —————————————————-

            You said: “I never obsessed over what a bad person I THINK you are. You made it a necessity to respond as if you’re barely out of the sixth grade.
            I NEVER, NOT ONCE said that you thought that anti-racism doesn’t exist. I repeated what you said in my arguments.”

            —————————————————-
            Reply:
            Lol! This is why it’s nearly impossible to debate with you, you keep EITHER making things up, or you express yourself badly enough that one can’t be sure WHAT you’re saying!

            Of course you didn’t say — not even once — that I said that “anti-racism” doesn’t exist! Because you said — a few hundred times — that I said that racism doesn’t exist. You accused me so many times of “denying that white racism exists” that it became really dreary.

            Of course anti-racism exists! Duh! I’m an anti-racist. You’re a racist. I’m opposed to your state of mind. That makes me an anti-racist.

            Yep. You obsessed over what a bad person you think I am. I couldn’t get you off that! I couldn’t convince you to address the points I made, and the questions I had. You wasted nearly all your time accusing me of being rude, and of not presenting what I was saying in a way you wanted me to.

            —————————————————-
            You said: “Let’s not forget who came to whom’s blog first. Let me remind you that it was YOU who came to MY blog with YOUR crap. And that’s what set everything off. Something I said touched a nerve with you. That’s why you felt the need to condemn a blog post that had nothing to do with you.”

            —————————————————-
            Reply:
            Lol! “whom’s blog.” Grammatically incorrect, but I like it! Well done!

            Now, as to your meaning: your blog is out there for the world to find. If you want to restrict who will see it, WordPress allows you to do that. If you’re NOT going to limit who will see it, then stop whining when people you don’t like see it. Simple as that.

            What touched a nerve with my colleague who came to see you, was your libeling of me and anyone who looks like me. You said some dirtbaggy things, things that were and are untrue, things that are grotesque things to say, and you needed to be called on it, so she called you on it.

            Your blog post, like so many of your blog posts, insinuated that all white people are racists. That’s a dirtbaggy thing. It’s like my implying that all black people are child molesters, when only some are.

            What would you say, if I started a blog, a blog that had a growing readership, and in that blog I posted anecdote after anecdote about black people who are child molesters. What would you say, what would you do, if I implied that my anecdotes suggested that all black people are, therefore, child molesters? Do you think that might be something you might want to push back at? No need to think about that question for a long time.

            You run a blog that’s racist, libelous, vile, disgusting, accusing me and those who look like me, of being flat-out really bad people… Then, you had the unmitigated gall to accuse me of having “offended” you!!!

            Well if I were a man prone to rugged language, I’d say “F*$# you!” After what you say?!?! Are you freakin’ kidding me?!?!?!

            But I don’t talk like that. So, I simply dismantled your silly, superficial, moronic arguments, and your idiotic state of mind. It wasn’t difficult. 🙂

            —————————————————-

            You said: “My blog is dedicated to helping in the discussion of racism and in a way fight it with words. Apparently, the subject of anti-black racism is a problem with you, and I suspect it’s because you THINK AND WANT IT to not be a significant issue.”

            —————————————————-
            Reply:
            Nope. Your blog is devoted to being a racist, and to giving a forum to other racists. Herneith, Diary, so many others are bad people. They hate white people, merely for the color of their skin. Then they have the nerve to get upset about “racism!”

            They’re bad people, and they’re likely idiots.

            The subject of anti-black racism should be a problem for everyone. Duh! It’s not a big problem in America, because white people aren’t racists simple as that. What I want is irrelevant. What is… simply is.

            An analyst analyzes. I’m an analyst. There’s no evidence that anti-black racism is a big problem for black people in America today. There’s plenty of evidence — and an increasing number of people seeing this — that all too many black people obsess over something that simply is not an obstacle in their paths.

            I even gave you an example of two black academics, card-carrying members of the Left and the Race Grievance Industry, who said that black Americans need to stop obsessing over white racism. And why? Because, they said, it’s just not a big problem for black people in America anymore.

            —————————————————-
            Best,

            — x

          2. Anti-white racism doesn’t exist. It never did. You may not know what racism is, or you DON’T WANT to know what it is to protect your feelings and thinking.

            Even if I said that you said racism doesn’t exist, I have repeated what you said, maybe not word for word, but it’s the same.

            You’re not anti-racist if you believe that racism against black people are not a major problem. That’s deliberately ignoring the harsh realities of black people likely for your own benefit.

            Yes. My blog is open for the world to see. But YOU still made the decision to come and comment. No one forced you.

            I never said nor implied that all white people are racists. If I did, that’s NOT the same as saying that white people are bad or evil, and furthermore, that’s NOT talking about you. YOU MADE THIS ABOUT YOU.

            The only reason why I think you’re a bad person is only based on how you respond, but also what you say in your responses. Only someone with a sheltered and privileged mindset would avoid taking accountability for his/her actions. And that’s your habit. You can’t seem to stand being responsible even though you want others to be. Hypocrisy in action.

            You can call me a racist all you want. All you’re doing is shielding and deflecting. Not to mention you love repeating probably as a mental tactic to wear me down and accept it, a form of gaslighting I suppose.

            Lastly, you can give a thousand examples of black academics that will say what you tell me. That doesn’t mean I should accept, and in case you didn’t notice, black people DO NOT and SHOULD NOT have the same mindset YOU WANT us to have to keep you sheltered from the cold reality of actual racism against people you obvious don’t really care about.

          3. You said: Anti-white racism doesn’t exist. It never did. You may not know what racism is, or you DON’T WANT to know what it is to protect your feelings and thinking.

            Reply:
            Lol! Okay, BW… so there are no people, in America who hate white people just because of the color of their skin. (*cough*cough*all your commenters *cough*cough*) You’re not only unserious in your so-called “anti-racism,” you’re amazingly ignorant.
            —————————————-

            You said: Even if I said that you said racism doesn’t exist, I have repeated what you said, maybe not word for word, but it’s the same.

            Reply:
            Uhhhhhh… Whuh? Your post said — specifically — that I said that “anti-racism doesn’t exist.” You’ve said specifically numerous times that I’ve said that “white racism doesn’t exist.” I’ve never, ever said either one of those things. That’s what I mean about your strawmen. You fabricate things. Those who invent things out of thin air are unserious about those things.
            —————————————-

            You said: You’re not anti-racist if you believe that racism against black people are not a major problem. That’s deliberately ignoring the harsh realities of black people likely for your own benefit.

            Reply:
            More silly hogwash. An understanding that “racism against black people is not a big problem,” is completely unrelated to whether or not I’m a racist. Obviously. BW, you’re boring me again. You say things that make no sense. I could be absolutely convinced that there’s vast racism against black people, and be a racist. Or not. Duh!
            —————————————-

            You said: Yes. My blog is open for the world to see. But YOU still made the decision to come and comment. No one forced you.

            Reply:
            Exactly. And you have no right to complain if you leave your blog’s door wide open for the world to see, and people who live in the world walk in. Duh!
            —————————————-

            You said: I never said nor implied that all white people are racists. If I did, that’s NOT the same as saying that white people are bad or evil, and furthermore, that’s NOT talking about you. YOU MADE THIS ABOUT YOU.

            Reply:
            You’ve implied it numerous times. If you made your blog about all white people, then you made it about me. I will, however, accept your admission that not all white people are racist. Thank you. It took some doing. Now, I encourage you to do a post indicating your understanding that (1) not all white people are racist, and (2) more to the point most white people are not racist. That would be an intelligent post, and would show that you’ve grown and evolved. That you finally woke up.
            —————————————-

            You said: The only reason why I think you’re a bad person is only based on how you respond, but also what you say in your responses. Only someone with a sheltered and privileged mindset would avoid taking accountability for his/her actions. And that’s your habit. You can’t seem to stand being responsible even though you want others to be. Hypocrisy in action.

            Reply:
            See? You don’t like how I present my views to you. Your assertion that “Only someone with a sheltered and privileged mindset would avoid taking accountability for his/her actions” is nonsensical. Thing #1: I never “avoid taking accountability.” Thing #2: Anyone on earth, regardless of his or her mindset, can “avoid taking accountability” at anytime in his life.
            —————————————-

            You said: You can call me a racist all you want. All you’re doing is shielding and deflecting. Not to mention you love repeating probably as a mental tactic to wear me down and accept it, a form of gaslighting I suppose.

            Reply:
            I called you a racist because you called yourself a racist. I took your word for it. You further demonstrated it amply.
            —————————————-

            You said: Lastly, you can give a thousand examples of black academics that will say what you tell me. That doesn’t mean I should accept, and in case you didn’t notice, black people DO NOT and SHOULD NOT have the same mindset YOU WANT us to have to keep you sheltered from the cold reality of actual racism against people you obvious don’t really care about.

            Reply:
            So much wrong in that paragraph! 🙂 Quick summary: (1) Okay. But a thousand black academics absolutely should inform your thinking. (2) No, you don’t have to believe anything. You should pay attention to it, and take it into account, and decide whether it has credibility, and if it does, see what that does to your thinking. (3) Your last sentence was an incoherent rant. You have no idea what I care about, and as I’ve said to you numerous times, you need to stop speculating and guessing about things — I call it “mind-reading” — that you can’t possibly know. Again: I’ll tell you what I care about. Then, and only then, will you know. Guessing and speculating about things that are irrelevant and unknowable are stupid and pointless. Don’t do it.
            —————————————-

            Best,

            — x

      2. Oh, and as I’ve said many dozens of times before: There is anti-black racism in America today.

        It’s just not a big problem in America today.

        There’s a lot more anti-white racism — because it’s socially acceptable.

        Best,

        — x

        1. I can only guess that such thinking comes from living a sheltered and privileged life, devoid of what the world actually is, and prefers to be more comfortable living in his world than facing the hardships of others.

          1. I can only guess that your state of mind comes from molesting small farm animals, and you don’t want anyone to know it.

            Key word in your post, and my reply: “guess.”

            Guesses are irrelevant, and stupid. Stop guessing. Don’t waste any more of my time or yours in guessing. Especially guessing about things you couldn’t possibly know.

            Best,

            — x

          2. If you don’t like me guessing, you can make it all go away by banning me. Calling guessing ‘irrelevant and stupid’ is an example of low-level thinking and anti-intellectualism.

          3. I don’t ban people. It’s the coward’s way out.

            Guessing is stupid and irrelevant. And pointless. Especially when you guess at things that are themselves stupid and irrelevant: like my life experiences.

            Don’t do it anymore.

            Your “anti-intellectualism” quip is just funny. There’s nothing “intellectual” about guessing. It’s… guessing. And it’s stupid. Don’t do it anymore.

            Best,

            — x

  2. One quick point… Your rather intense defensiveness in the face of the term “anti-white racism” is instructive.

    You and I both know that there are plenty of non-white people who hate white people merely because of the color of their skin. Many of them comment on your blog.

    There’s, obviously, plenty of anti-white racism in America today.

    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