Asians, Asiatics, and Desis, oh my.
Why say anything? After all, it’ll be mostly White Americans getting sick and dying, and who care about those long-nosed, hairy barbarians, eh?
That cogelite’s disdain for “cranky old White folks” is just dripping like venom from his brown, alien, Desi mouth. But even a far-leftist knows what Conservatism, Inc. wants to avoid acknowledging: non-Whites care not for conservatism, only “cranky old Whites” do, and those “cranky old Whites” have grown tired of alien Asiatic filth like Roy talking down to them, taking them for granted (while expecting their votes like a feudal lord expects his serfs’ services), and ignoring their interests and desires. Mainstream conservatism is becoming an ideology without a constituency, as Whites begin to wake up, thanks to Der Touchback and his incoherent campaign.
Scum like Roy fail to understand that their own contemptuous dismissal of Whites and White interests is to a large degree responsible for the rise of Trump and the demise of mainstream conservatism.
And a follow up question.
The answer: Brown Privilege.
Follow-up question: why does Andrew Hamilton still write for WN blogs?
Selective, very, very selective.
Well, so one of the complaints about the execrable South Asian NEC D’Souza is plagiarism, a charge more mainstream sources have also leveled against the even more execrable South Asian NEC Zakaria. Very good. But then the plagiarism of Andrew Hamilton is ignored, and his boringly repetitive essays praised by movement comment thread peanut galleries. If plagiarism is wrong, it’s wrong no matter who does it, no?
This sort of “movement” cherrypicking extends to the favorite past-time of “gay-baiting” various “movement” personages. That is 100% politically motivated (here I refer to internal “movement” politics. not real Yockeyian High Politics). After all, there are some august “movement” personages widely rumored to be gay (no names, I don’t engage in this sort of womanly gossip-mongering), but who are NEVER the target of the sort of vulgar gay-baiting that takes places on “movement” blogs and comment threads. The reason? Well, gay-baiting in the “movement” is typically done by “activists” belonging to specific “precincts” within the “movement” and they share with those august personages a similar set of beliefs. On the other hands, the targets of the baiting are memetic opponents within the “movement” to those doing the baiting, so the accusations and insinuations come out specifically in those cases (the “movement” being so obviously successful that it can afford to be ridden with this sort of sordid public squabbling). It’s clear that there is no principled opposition to homosexuality as such, because a distinction is made between “our guys” (let’s not mention the rumors) and “their guys” (mention the rumors at every opportunity). That says more about the character of the baiters than it does the baitees; even more so, it says much about the character of the pathetic cesspool known as the “American racialist movement.”