Here is a banner from the 2009 Pride parade in Stockholm. It was part of a float organised by Swedish anarchist feminists. The banner reads "We hate white rich straight men".
There's reason to take note of the slogan. It expresses openly a political idea that is widely held on the left. The idea is that the reason there is injustice in the world is that white, rich, straight men created society to be unjust in order to enjoy an unearned privilege over those that they "othered".
Most on the left don't conclude from the theory that white men should be hated. But many do conclude that the great moral cause is to oppose the white racism and the sexism which is thought to maintain white privilege and patriarchy. To be against white racism, in particular, is thought to be the great moral crusade of our times.
That has a number of negative consequences for ordinary whites. It means that any success that white people have is attributed to an unearned privilege rather than to hard work, or to family stability, or to stable community life. That's in contrast to the success that people of other races have, which is, in ordinary fashion, held to be a result of their efforts and talents.
It means too that it's difficult for whites to identify positively as whites. Most young white people are subjected at school and at university to a barrage of messages about white racism, and those who do attempt to identify positively as whites will often be assumed to be motivated by a desire to uphold "white supremacy". Again, whites are treated exceptionally in this regard - there is no similar pressure on, say, Australian Aborigines, to identify negatively as a people.
Finally, the theory that whites are to blame for social injustice means that few on the left are concerned about the future fate of historically white nations and peoples. First, the theory portrays whites as all powerful, so it's difficult for many on the left to recognise that whites might be vulnerable. Second, the aim of the theory is to bring whites down, so the focus is on how to disempower whites, rather than how to help them survive into the future.
Will the world enter into an era of social justice - of perfected freedom and equality - when there are no more rich, white, straight men around? That is what the leftist theory predicts - but given human nature it seems highly unlikely. Already it's the case in the U.S. that Asian Americans are on average wealthier, better educated and are over-represented in the professions compared to whites. As whites decline, it's likely that Asians in both the U.S. and Australia will come to dominate in these areas. So what, then, was the point of the decades long assault on the white majority?
"As whites decline, it's likely that Asians in both the U.S. and Australia will come to dominate in these areas. So what, then, was the point of the decades long assault on the white majority?"ReplyDelete
The point of a sustained assault is to destroy the target.
True, but the theoretical reason for destroying the target (us) is to get rid of the reason for "social injustice" (i.e. inequality in group outcomes etc).ReplyDelete
I'm pointing out that the the inequalities are still going to be there, just with another group (Asians) doing best.
You've got a good point that social inequalities will still be there. We know this, because we've seen the end of White power repeatedly, as in Zimbabwe, and societies free of tyranny and social inequality do not result.ReplyDelete
This is what you'd expect. The end of Whites (as people with collective clout and an awareness of their identity and interests, and increasingly the end in the purely material sense of the frequency with which certain genes are represented in the population of a given area) also means the end of things that Whites care about, from typically White culture to conservation to typically White political ideals.
Kill the silkworms and you don't get more silk.
This is obvious, and it's been proven practically a lot in the last half century, on scales ranging from the neighborhood to the city to the state to the region. It's hard to believe that people who guide political movements have not noticed it.
Moreover, powerful progressives show by how they act that they do know about it. The likes of Dominique Strauss-Kahn are not flooding into Harare to live in post-oppression bliss.
So the implication is that for influential progressives the destruction of the target of their attacks is rewarding in itself.
I think there are militants who are acting against their long-term ethnic interests (which is no big news, as history is full of people who like being on the winning or at least the aggressive side and have no problem harming their own ethnic or racial groups), and powerful people (who are likely to be more prone to forming cohesive, effective groups, because - duh! - they're people who get to the top) who are acting very much in keeping with what we know about how intense in-groups think and act, taking self-flattering and self-exculpating views of their in-group and its history and activities, and taking highly negative views of the out-group of deracinated, un-organized, socially defenseless Whites.
Neither stratum is looking for social justice as equal outcomes. Both strata are seeking social justice in a more retributive sense. That means that when Whites, who are freely blamed for all manner of things, get what's coming to them, collectively, on a wide scale and irreversibly, there is social justice.
As Buffy the Vampire Slayer said: "The evil is slain. Let's party."
Peace has come to Zimbabwe
Third World's right on the one
Now's the time for celebration
'Cause we've only just begun
Why do i keep getting the feeling that my grandchildren are going to be living in Germany in the future? So much poison directed at White people. It's insane. Deluded nonsense. A folie à deux.ReplyDelete
Make that folie à plusieurs.ReplyDelete
"I'm pointing out that the the inequalities are still going to be there, just with another group (Asians) doing best."ReplyDelete
That just means that our eastern friends are next up on the chopping block, right after us.
Who is funding all of the "social justice" programs out there? When that group of people is fully ascendant, then there will simply not be any more talk of social justice or inequality.
The quest for equality, social justice, fairness, whatever they wish to call it now - is nothing more than the age old quest for power cloaked in a pleasant-looking exterior.
Anon, I agree that the leftist politics I described can be used for those seeking power or spoils within the system.ReplyDelete
But the ones who hold to it most fanatically in my workplace, and who do the most to propagate it, are those with the most to lose - the middle-class, cultural Anglo types. It has become their moral world view. All the others are a bit blase about it.
So it most needs to be challenged amongst those who aren't using it for power or spoils, but who have latched onto it as a great moral cause (and perhaps as a tribal marker of cultural Anglodom - but one of the most foolish of tribal markers ever adopted as it is a dissolving kind of belief system).
Again, I don't disagree that there are people out there for whom such beliefs cloak their real purposes. But I've worked alongside the middle-class, cultural Anglos for a long time now and I know them well. These leftist beliefs serve a role for them in forming their moral universe - and it has become a kind of "culture" which makes it difficult to shift.
White australians have a breeding problem courtesy of women delaying marriage and pursuing career. Not only that being empowered leads to a decrease in a pool of marriageble men due to her hypergamy. Thats why asians would be a majority if Australians don't do something about it.ReplyDelete
Straight white men have risen to the top socially and cuturally. They did this in various ways, but primarily out competing everyone else, across the board.ReplyDelete
This liberal Dogma is just a control feature. it turns that drive to outcompete your neighbour in all things inwards, forcing white men and women to waste all thier energies that formerly was targetted at their competitors.
Whos controling it? The cultures that were continuously losing the battle. Communists, socialists, feminists, The leaders of the "oppressed", etc.
And this system only works in times of prosperity, because straight white men are happily complacent when thier lives are relatively wealthy and comfortable.
It will all come crashing down pretty soon, when straight white men who busy themselves with survival dont have time to absorb these values because they are all applied externally, via media and true enemies.
Social justice is only a useful concept when there actually IS enough to go around. When a decision has to be made over limited resources? When one group has to die so another group can survive? Well, I believe that will be the end of these little social games. And thats because the advantages that propelled white men to the top of the cultural food chain havent been removed, they've only been supressed.
These feminists are crazy but inconsequential. If conservatives want to delay our demise, they should look at the role big business plays - big business is the only group remaining that supports mass immigration (for cheap labour), mass immigration allows for the de-emphasis of family because it's no longer necessary to reproduce when we can just import. If we stopped mass immigration tomorrow, and thus, needed large, strong families to survive - I think things like progressivism, feminism, and the gay agenda would disappear straightaway - and wouldn't that be a wonderful feeling.ReplyDelete
"Why do i keep getting the feeling that my grandchildren are going to be living in Germany in the future?"ReplyDelete
To clarify. Germany is the strongest western country. Economically it rises, while the USA sinks. Germany doesn't have the irreversible demographic problems many other western countries. So many other western countries seem hell bent on suiciding while Germany powers ahead. They just need to start having children.
"So what, then, was the point of the decades long assault on the white majority?"ReplyDelete
Hatred is its own reward. They will still be hating white men when there are no white men in power. This can already be seen in parts of American society where there are few or no white men in positions of power, that doesn't stop them being hated.
Deliberate social engineering to destroy Western culture and tradition admitted before the House of Commons by some UN loser: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18519395ReplyDelete
They just need to start having children.ReplyDelete
German men are having children.
Just not with German women.
In the 1960s "Anti-racists" forced ALL and ONLY white countries to open their borders to non-white immigration. Then "Anti-racists" forced ALL and ONLY white people to "integrate" or face consequences for being "naziswhowanttokill6millionjews." Now "Anti-racists" are calculating that ALL and ONLY white children will become minorities and eventually EXTINCT. If "Anti-racists" did this to ALL and ONLY black countries, it would be called genocide. "Anti-racist" is a codeword for anti-white.ReplyDelete