America's structures are Western. Your Congress, your lobbying groups, your free speech, and the way ordinary Americans either get involved or ignore politics are peculiarly Western, not the way most of the world operates. But the fact that only about a third of Americans deem it important to vote is horrifying in light of how close you are to losing your Western character.
Writing letters to the press, manning stands at county fairs, hosting fund-raising dinners, attending rallies, setting up conferences, writing your Congressman -- that is what you know, and what you are comfortable with. Those are the political methods you've created for yourselves to keep your country on track and to ensure political accountability.
But woe to you if -- or more likely, when -- the rules change....
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: then I read the racist article he linked.
Americans may soon find themselves unable or unwilling to stand up to challenge the new political methods that will be the inevitable result of the ethnic metamorphosis now taking place in America.
Unable to cope with the new rules of the game -- violence, mob riots, intimidation through accusations of racism , demands for proportionality based on racial numbers, and all the other social and political weapons used by the have-nots to bludgeon treasure and power from the haves -- Americans, like others before them, will no doubt cave in. They will compromise away their independence and ultimately their way of life.
Posts: 389 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
Our Western culture and character has been more compromised than you know, J.B! I went to enroll my son in kindergarten last month and there on the board they had posted Arabic Numerals! Arabic! In the United States of America! Apparently the Arabs have been trying to foist their numbers on us since MCC!!!
Well no more I say! We don't need their stinking zero! We got along fine without it for centuries, thank you very much! Hopefully whoever is elected president in MMIIX will be willing to take a stand and restore the supremacy of Western numerals in our schools!
To begin, unlike in South Africa, white people are the majority here. And shall be for a long time to come.
Second, let's read up on apartheid, shall we?
"The rules of Apartheid meant that people were legally classified into a racial group — the main ones being Black, White, Coloured and Asian (consisting of Indians and Pakistanis) — and were separated from each other on the basis of the legal classification. The Black majority, in particular, legally became citizens of particular bantustans (homelands) that were nominally sovereign nations but operated more akin to United States Indian Reservations, Canadian First Nations reserves, or Australian aboriginal reserves. In reality, however, a majority of Black South Africans never resided in these "homelands."
In practice, this prevented non-white people — even if actually resident in white South Africa — from having a vote or influence, restricting their rights to faraway homelands that they may never have visited. Education, medical care, and other public services were segregated, and those available to black people were generally inferior."
Woe be unto white men, how unfair it is that our evil actions come and bite us in the ass. After all, we're supposed to be allowed to rule, rape, and kill every non-white person in the world as we see fit, aren't we? How unfair that we don't get to anymore.
"In the run-up to the 1948 elections, the National Party (NP) campaigned on its policy of apartheid. The NP narrowly defeated Smuts' United Party, and formed a coalition government with the Afrikaner Party (AP), under Protestant cleric Daniel Francois Malan's leadership. It immediately began implementing apartheid: legislation was passed prohibiting miscegenation (mixed-race marriage), individuals were classified by race, and a classification board was created to rule in questionable cases. The Group Areas Act of 1950 became the heart of the apartheid system designed to geographically separate the racial groups. The Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya which lasted from 1952 to 1960 may have influenced both thinking and policies in South Africa. The Separate Amenities Act of 1953 created, among other things, separate beaches, buses, hospitals, schools and universities. The existing pass laws were tightened further: blacks and coloureds were compelled to carry identity documents. These identity documents became a sort of passport by which prevention of migration to 'white' South Africa could be enforced. Blacks were prohibited from living in (or even visiting) 'white' towns without specific permission. For Blacks, living in the cities was normally restricted to those who were employed in the cities. Direct family relatives were excluded, thus separating wives from husbands and parents from children."
"The principal "apartheid laws" were as follows:
Amendment to The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949) Amendment to The Immorality Act (1950) This law made it a criminal offence for a white person to have any sexual relations with a person of a different race. The Population Registration Act (1950) This law required all citizens to be registered as black, white or coloured. The Suppression of Communism Act (1950) This law banned the South African Communist Party as well as any other party the government chose to label as 'communist'. It made membership in the SACP punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment. The South African minister of justice, R.F. Swart, drafted the law. The Group Areas Act (27 April 1950) This law partitioned the country into different areas, with different areas being allocated to different racial groups. This law represented the very heart of apartheid because it was the basis upon which political and social separation was to be constructed. Bantu Authorities Act (1951) This law created separate government structures for black people. Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act (1951) This law allowed the government to demolish black shackland slums. Native Building Workers Act and Native Services Levy (1951) This law forced white employers to pay for the construction of proper housing for black workers recognized as legal residents in 'white' cities. The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (1953) This law prohibited people of different races from using the same public amenities, such as drinking fountains, restrooms, and so on. The Bantu Education Act (1953) This law brought all black schooling under government control, effectively ending mission-run schools. Bantu Urban Areas Act (1954) This law curtailed black migration to the cities. The Mines and Work Act (1956) This law formalised racial discrimination in employment. The Promotion of Black Self-Government Act (1958) This law set up separate territorial governments in the 'homelands', designated lands for black people where they could have a vote. The aim was that these homelands or 'bantustans' would eventually become independent of South Africa. In practice, the South African government exercised a strong influence over these separate states even after some of them became 'independent'. Bantu Investment Corporation Act (1959) This law set up a mechanism to transfer capital to the homelands in order to create jobs there. The Extension of University Education Act (1959) This law created separate universities for Blacks, Coloureds and Indians. Physical Planning and Utilisation of Resources Act (1967) This law allowed the government to stop industrial development in 'white' cites and redirect such development to homeland border areas. The aim was to speed up the relocation of blacks to the homelands by relocating jobs to homeland areas. Black Homeland Citizenship Act (1970) This law changed the status of the inhabitants of the 'homelands' so that they were no longer citizens of South Africa. The aim was to ensure whites became the demographic majority within 'white' South Africa. The Afrikaans Medium Decree (1974) This decree required the use of Afrikaans and English on a fifty-fifty basis in high schools outside the homelands. "
Basically, the blacks were even more seriously oppressed in South Africa than they were in America. It's not a surprise they acted to end it finally.
If our roles were reversed, I'd not be surprised if we whites acted the same way.
You know, freedom and all of that.
Of course, the black people are still poor and are still being discriminated against there. 90% of the poor there are black, while thye make up like 78% of the population.
80% of farming land is still in the hands of white people.
The depravation still given to blacks is ignored, while criminal actions against whites is focused on a great deal, and used as fuel to keep blacks down.
Yeah, there's some discrimination agianst whites as well in jobs and so forth, due to their Equality in Employment act and related things, and there are definitely some negative feelings towards whites.
Nearly 80% of the population is black. And yet until recently they were oppressed to an incredible degree, an evil degree.
A small minority group oppressed a huge majority, until they had enough.
The situation is very different, and though the whites in South Africa certainly don't deserve to, say, be oppressed the same way, well, if things aren't going perfectly for them, they deserve it for what they did.
Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Am I crazy or is this the same article JB posted on his first foray into our ornery group?
Posts: 789 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
You are the crazy one, introducing A-rabic numbers into our little discussion. They sound like they're related to A-Qaedic numbers to me, somehow, not sure how.
JB says he's a Jew in, I think, LA. Wonder what his ethnic and racial background is. Semitic? Indo-European? African? He may not know, but (hush) there are people out there who think Jews are of a lower race -- it's in our genes. Remember how Einstein tried to push Jewish Physics onto Aryans? JB, here's an experiment. Gather one person of every race and ethic group you can find. Form a circle facing inward and each put your hand on the head of the person to your left (a glove is allowed). This will demonstrate that you are superior to that person, and he is superior to the person to his left, etc.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: I was all ready to comend JB on finally writing a post that wasn't total ****, then I read the racist article he linked. I guess leopards don't change their spots. Or sheets.
That's what I was thinking too, but for me it was J.B.'s last line that gave it away. Everything's nice and reasonable up until "But woe to you if -- or more likely, when -- the rules change....". I know I've already mentioned the book once this week so I'm gonna sound like a broken record, but that line was enough of a clue that things were about to go on a Turner Diaries tangent about the need of proud white Americans to be ready to take up arms against the brown menace
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Well, once they got too much publicity for drinking the blood of Arab kids, they had to devise some other scheme to rule the world.
The thing I always find interesting with the woe to us "western white folks" is the failure to look at this country as a stand-alone entity, not as an extension of "western" or "European" cultures. Yes, that's where we got our start, yet we've now gone beyond that.
The USA is a nation of immigrants and we take our national identity from the sum of our parts. When the sum of our parts shifts to other cultures and norms, so shifts our national identity. That's what it means to be American and that is what it means to be a part of the melting pot. The USA never was and never will be a stagnant culture of one type or one overwhelming ethnicity.
Embrace the change, it's the only thing that's constant in this country. I, for one, have no issues with the Latino influx. I love the food, the culture, the darker, exotic, attractive people... The influx of new ideals, ideas, foods, ways of life... good stuff, I say.
Those in fear of the change and shouting the warnings are those who are being unAmerican, IMO. Very, very few of us "Americans" ancestors came here originally. OTOH, the "Natives" weren't native if you track back far enough... So who has the claim as belonging or being "American" any more than any other group? None of us, that's who.
This does not mean I take kindly to messing with our Constitution, but there's no reason we can't have our cultural growth and demographic shifts and still leave our laws intact.
On the other hand, nothing lasts forever. I was reading the last interview with Kurt Vonnegut last night and he closed out saying how disappointed he was in his country and how dishonest and hated we seem to be internationally.
Honestly, it got me thinking a new thought... One that will freak many of you out and get the good 'ol American blood boiling up - perhaps our time has come to leave America behind and go forward into something else. All things come to an end at some point. Are we nearing our end as a country? And is this really such a bad thing after all?
quote: Honestly, it got me thinking a new thought... One that will freak many of you out and get the good 'ol American blood boiling up - perhaps our time has come to leave America behind and go forward into something else. All things come to an end at some point. Are we nearing our end as a country? And is this really such a bad thing after all?
Let me guess, a global free market without borders where people are free to live as they please, where private property means something?
Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:weapons used by the have-nots to bludgeon treasure and power from the haves --
SS - no, I didn't think that far along. Just the beginnings of a thought experiment of where we go from here if the USA as a sovereign entity is not going to be around in the future. Off the top of my head, I’d prefer to scale back away from centralized national control back to regional control – State and local, if you will, for a start. If that means no more USA, so be it…
Private property, yes... open borders I'm not so sure about at this point. In a perfect world where there are no regional disparities, that would be fine... But in that case a rising tide does not lift all ships; that rising tide would drown us.
Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
He may not know, but (hush) there are people out there who think Jews are of a lower race -- it's in our genes.
Actually, Commentary a few months ago discussed a number of studies demonstrating the higher-than-average IQ of Jews, and the predominance of Jews in the elites of every intellectual endeavor that follows from that fact; and it ended with the claim (figurative, but I wonder by how much) that this is a sign that the Jews are God's chosen people---since no nearby ethnic group has a similar high IQ. Talk about going from thesis to antithesis!
I wonder how much anti-Semitism is meant to compensate for feelings of inferiority.
Like David Niven said, pity the man who must expose his shortcomings to get laugh.
J.B. - that's an interesting avenue. Whatsa matta, girlfriend leave you for a better endowed brotha?
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thus, is also the reason why blacks and hispanics hate white folk.
At least JB is now out of the closet. I guess that what this means is that being a member of OMeg's glorified race of Jews doesn't apply to all of its members, and thinking poorly of others doesn't actually create distance between you and them.
IP: Logged |
I believe most blacks and Hispanics have more sense than to lump all white folks together for the purpose of loving or hating them. Loving and hating really should be a bit more directed than that to make it worth the energy.
Posts: 789 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Those sources are BS, there was something in the Chicago Tribune that put the hate crime numbers at 60% white on black, 20% black on white, 20% other. (And 90% black violent crime altogether, 10% white). Just making a crappy graphic doesn't entitle you to claim it was from the Justice Dept. and FBI.
"What the statistics say On one hand, African-Americans bear the brunt of violent crime in the U.S.: In 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available, blacks were more than twice as likely as whites to fall victim to serious violent crime, most often at the hands of other blacks.
Blacks are also the overwhelming majority of victims of attacks recorded by the FBI as hate crimes. In 2005, blacks were the victims in 68 percent of nearly 5,000 hate-crime incidents nationwide, while whites were the victims in 20 percent of the cases. Whites accounted for 60 percent of known hate-crime offenders, while blacks accounted for 20 percent."
After doing this, I just realized that your graph is bull. It compares "black on white crime" with "white on black HATE crime." So to make your graph evidence, you must prove that all white on black crimes are classified as hate crimes. Either that, or show us a graph comparing a) White on black and black on white crime total, or b) white on black and black on white hate crime.
This guy is so FULL OF XENOPHOBIC RACIST CRAP! I heard this garbage constantly from racist white Afrikaaners during my two years in South Africa from 1992 through 1993. They constantly considered themselves the height of civilization, and the blacks the barbarians. By the way, this was when deKlerk was in power, only a year before blacks voted for the first time in their own country.
quote:Leone and Zimbabwe are perfect examples of those mistakes. Sierra Leone is in perpetual civil war, and Zimbabwe -- once thriving, stable Rhodesia -- is looting the very people (the white men) who feed the country.
I also met many former Rhodesians in South Africa. They were the most bitter and blatantly racist people I met, usually worse than Afrikaaners. But can you guess what Rhodesians typically thought about deKlerk's reforms? THEY SUPPORTED THEM! Why? Because they were smart enough to know on some level that it was their own stubborn, racist stupidity that led to them losing their country. They didn't want the same thing to happen to South Africa that happened to Rhodesia (and for the record, it hasn't happened to remotely the same extent). They knew that compromise and inclusion was the only way to avoid a black super-majority getting fed up.
quote:Yet Westerners do not admit that the same kind of savagery could come to America when enough immigrants of the right type assert themselves. The fact is, Americans are sitting ducks for Third World exploitation of the Western conscience of compassion.
Again, bull crap. Let's take France as an example, where Arab governments (NOT the French government) insisted early on that the French NOT assimilate Arab immigrants, but instead allow them to create their own communities. Sure, that sounded nice and tolerant until the recent tensions boiled over.
The truth is, Americans need to make sure we stay a melting pot based on individual liberty and the Rule of Law. And to pretend that this kind of cultural compromise is dangerous is to equate one's current culture with the ideal, and by so doing shut off any chance of progressing further as a people. I look forward to a continued melting pot where the best of all peoples is combined, and the worst of all of us is burned off... meaning people like this jerk.
Our punctuation and attribution traditions are Western, too. If we fail to fight for our language, what is next? Stand up and type like men and women, not like apes! You will rue the day when unmarked quotes blight the page and diminish these good forums! Come on people, up with periods!!!