Category: Brown Privilege

White Privilege Bullying

Lessons of the schoolyard.

I have written on this topic before, but it is useful to set down a brief but comprehensive summary of the problem.  Therefore, here I make three arguments:

1. White Privilege, as defined by the Left as racially-specific advantages possessed by Whites, does not exist.

2. Even if White Privilege existed, it would be justified.

3. Attacks against Whites, re: White Privilege, are simply bullying against Whites because Whites, as a race, are a bunch of pathetic, mewling, cowardly weaklings.

1. The argument that White Privilege does not exist can be briefly subdivided into three parts.

A. A people being demographically dispossessed in their own nations – even in their ancestral homelands of Europe – are obviously not privileged.  Mass immigration into White nations, against the wishes of the populace and imposed by a hostile elite, is not “privilege.”  It is genocide. Declining White birthrates and increasing White suicide rates are not signs of “privilege” – they are signs of oppression and despair.  The opioid crisis among White Americans is not “privilege” – it is hopelessness and despair.  The fact that most politicians in White nations are racially White means nothing, as most of them are openly hardcore anti-White.  The question should be – whose interests do those politicians represent?

B. A people discriminated against de jure by law (affirmative action, hate speech laws in Europe that criminalize natives speaking up in defense of their own group interests) and de facto by political correctness, pop culture, and social pricing, is not “privileged.”

A people not allowed to organize on the basis of their own identity and in defense of that identity and its interests are hardly “privileged” – it is the complete opposite.  A people whose racial spokesmen are attacked in the streets with impunity, mocked by the leftist establishment, ridiculed in their own nation by aliens, deplatformed by corporations, and selectively targeted by the legal system – such a people are the opposite of “privileged.”  The English in Rotherham were, and are, not “privileged.”  White Americans and Europeans who cannot safely walk the streets of their own cities are not “privileged.”  Compare James Watson – reduced to selling his Nobel Prize after being “unpersoned” for merely suggesting the possibility of racial differences in intelligence – to Al Sharpton – whose activist career is summarized here – who was a friend of Presidents (Obama), speaker at political conventions (Democrat), a mainstream political commentator (MSNBC) – and we see the reality of Colored Privilege vs. the fantasy of White Privilege.

C. Although I disagree with Sailer about the census, he is correct about “The Flight from White.”  You see, Whites are so privileged that groups petition to NOT officially be counted as White.  South Asians previously successfully removed themselves from the White category, and the MENA group wants to do the same now.  People with any hint of “Indian Princess” ancestry in their family trees are desperate to be seen as non-White.  Whites pose as non-White, trying to “pass” in the other direction.  It is a strange sort of “privilege” indeed that people are so very eager NOT to partake of; it seems that the “invisible backpack” is a burden too heavy for anyone to want to carry.

2. Even if it did really exist, White Privilege would be justified, because it would not be “privilege” at all, in the sense of an undeserved largess (which actually describes Colored Privilege).  One would not call Bill Gates “privileged” at Microsoft – it is his company.  The Chinese are not “privileged” in China – it is their own country.  Likewise, Whites are not “privileged” in their own nations – instead, it are the alien peoples given advantages in White countries who are the ones truly privileged.  And if White Americans are “privileged” because they have a higher per capita net worth than Blacks and Hispanics, then Jews and Asians are privileged even more.  Oh, the latter have their goodies because of “intelligence” and “hard work.”   Yeah, and Whites are pretty smart and hard-working too, by the way – building nations that Jews and Asians want to migrate to.  

3. If accusations of White Privilege are absurd – and they are – why do they exist?  It is the lesson of the schoolyard: those who are weak and allow themselves to be bullied will continue to suffer so.  Accusations of White Privilege made in the context of White Oppression and White Powerlessness are a form of bullying from the Left/Colored Alliance.  Because Whites are a race of pathetic mewling cowards and never push back against this bullying they can expect more of it, just like the boy who allows himself to be pushed around in the schoolyard can expect nothing but more abuse.  If the boy fights back, even if he loses, the bullying will likely stop, especially if he gets some good “licks” in; bullies do not like victims who fight back, since they prefer the meek and powerless.  The abusive bullying of Whites as a race will decline in proportion to the extent that Whites actively and explicitly defend their interests as a race.

Ironically, it is precisely because Whites are not privileged that they are accused of being so.  If Whites had true privilege no one would dare bring it up in fear of the consequences.  It is only because Whites are a subaltern low-caste group that they can be bullied and gaslighted by being accused of having “privilege” while they are in reality a vilified powerless group losing their nations and their future.

I suppose that the real, hidden meaning of “White Privilege” is the privilege of being born as someone of European descent, and all that means racially, and with respect to being a legitimate heir to the Classical and Western/Faustian High Cultures.  There’s racial envy and resentment involved, and a desire to tear down those that the Guks view, at least subconsciously, as better than themselves.

Advertisements

Internal Refugees?

The next liberal cause celebre?

The more rational of White leftist “progressives” should be wary of their enthusiastic defense of the “international law” assertion of the (virtually unlimited) rights of refugees to migrate and the equally expansive obligations of (White) nations to host them.

How about applying the same standards to internal refugees, officially called “internally displaced persons?”

Such people are not currently “legally” considered refugees, but, like anything else, properly applied SJW hysteria, Jewish activism, pressure groups, media campaigns, etc. – the whole System acting in concert – can change that.  

Imagine if “internally displaced persons” are given all the rights of international refugees.  Why, perhaps, White liberals in their gated communities and in their leafy blue state suburbs will be legally obligated to take in some ghetto Negro refugees from the inner city, Negro migrants fleeing the “urban warfare” of, say, Detroit and Chicago.  Open your doors wide!

Even more painful for the liberals would be if White bigots fleeing urban colored violence would be considered refugees, and the homes of White liberals had to be opened to take in the great unwashed of bad-White racists.  Not to worry, though, no chance of that scenario, just like, for example, White South Africans are mysteriously not accorded the same rights, and welcomed as refugees, as are Middle Easterners or Africans.

But the first scenario?  Forced racial integration and abrogation of White property rights, and the even more pernicious abrogation of private freedom of association (public being lost long ago), under the guise of “refugee rights?”  Not only possible, but increasingly likely, given continued and unabated SJW hysteria, Colored Privilege, and White cowardice.

You read it here first!

This is the lesson of the schoolyard: If someone is bullied and refuse to stand up for themselves and refuse to fight back, then they WILL be bullied continuously, without end.  However, if they do stand up for themselves and do fight back, get their licks in, do some damage to their opponent, then, even if they lose, it is unlikely that they will be bullied again.  Bullies tend to be cowards and look for easy prey, they look for those will won’t fight back. In other words, cowardly bullies target cowardly victims.

Whites as a race are akin to a cowardly bullied pansy who doesn’t fight back, won’t stand up for himself, and is therefore marked as easy pickings.  Whites being bullied to now accept feral coloreds as obligatory internal refugees would be just another example of White uselessness and cowardice.

But, perhaps, just perhaps, the Trump election was just the tip of the iceberg, and at some point, especially after being disappointed and betrayed by the globohomo milksop cuck Trump, there will be a growing White backlash that will make Trumpism seem like a mild political hiccup.

Who knows?  

Only time will tell.

Derb and Razib

More HBD nonsense.

“Razib”: A “working geneticist” who previously demonstrated an inability to distinguish “homologous chromosomes” from “sister chromatids.”  We can therefore see that the Asian influx into what used to be American science is doing wonders.
Also, we once again see the execrable pile of frozen crap Derbyshire promoting “Razib.”  For those who may not know, “Razib” (once described by another race blogger as a “Bengali castaway”) was one of the founders of the anti-White hate blog Gene Expression, which raised HBD to new heights as a political movement (hence, Derbyshire’s interest).  That blog attacked White nationalism, harshly critiqued Salter in the most juvenile and personal terms (equating Salter with an unsavory character in Dr. Strangelove), and, most telling of all, had a long-standing feud with Majority Rights, in which links of Majority Rights from Gene Expression were re-directed to highly explicit inter-racial Black male-White female pornography.
Keep all this in mind in judging Derbyshire, who constantly promotes and sings the praises of “Razib” the Brownster.  Then, no longer wonder why this blog calls Derbyshire a hard-core anti-White far–Left neo-Marxist.

In the News, 6/10/15 and a Bit on Christianity

Assorted odds and ends from around the “movement.”
Is this an example of Slager’s White Privilege?  One must give credit to Stix (putting aside his ancestry) for pointing out all these hypocrisies.
The Counter-Currents website seems to be down. One hopes they are updating their site to fix certain commenting problems.
Looking at this and this (and the past promotion of the Raciology embarrassment) summarizes The Occidental Observer over the past few years: some strange amalgamation of Christianity promotion and apologia, HBD, and mild Nordicism. Although, while I vehemently disagree with Ferrari’s defense of Christianity, one can give her credit for pointing out the possible Tribe affiliation of the commentator quoted here.
Normally, I find juvenile the “movement’s” shtick of pointing and sputtering “Jew!” every time someone writes something they don’t like, and, as well, it is not definitive that the commentator in this case is actually Jewish, rather than the typical “movement” nitwit.  But, true enough, what WN is not going to spell out “Yahweh?”  Who is going to know or care about “Jesus/Joshua” or whatever?
But, like Christian obsessives everywhere, Ferrari misses other points about this issue. Instead of labeling this as an example of “Jews bashing Christianity” why not label it as an example of “Jews trying to divide Europeans against one another” which is usually more typically the case, and something the HBDers, brownsters, and other Asiatics and Asiatic-lovers attempt frequently? If one wants to make the case against Christianity, which I do and, apparently, TOO does not, one can argue that this religion, as Nietzsche argued, destroyed Rome and the classical civilization, it’s a levantine contamination which first affected Rome (given that the Empire was the leading enemy of the Tribe and the focal point of Western politics at that time), and later spread northwards. Rome was the first victim of Christianity, not an existential part of it.

And, you know, Jews have reasons to dislike Christianity apart from some diabolical plot to undermine Western morality. They no doubt see Christianity as a perversion of their own faith, a pathetic imitation derived from the attempt of the lowly “goyim” trying to mimic the “chosen ones.” More importantly, they blame Christianity for much of their “persecution” in Europe over the centuries. As Yockey pointed out, during the religious phase of Western culture, hostility to the Jews took a religious form, and that lasted a long time and left deep memories.  Later, during the materialist phase of Western civilization, hostility toward the Jews took a racial form – and, to no surprise, Jews are hostile to racialism as well.

The Jewish attitude toward Christianity is perhaps best reflected in the golem myth – a creation meant as a defense against one’s enemies that backfires and turns against its creators themselves (but which still does much harm to those enemies in the meantime).  Despite their vaunted intelligence, the Jews have a historical tendency to create such golems and they never seem to learn from their mistakes – Christianity, Communism, and now the Globalist Multiculturalism that will eventually, in the long run, destroy the Jews and their beloved Israel as it is destroying the West.  So much the worse for them and so much the worse for the West, the first victim of all these golems.