Looks like there really is "white" privelege, just not quite what we've been lead to believe ... pic attached. Enjoy, and create your world :) On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 10:56:31AM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:44:21PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 07:53:32AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
If you are white, you are racist. If you are racist, which is to say white, a large proportion of the voters, soon to be a majority, believe you should be physically attacked.
On 1/12/2017 2:45 AM, Steve Kinney wrote:
What a nasty little fantasy world.
Pretty much everyone who thought Zimmerman guilty, and pretty much everyone who prematurely condemned the Duke Lacrosse team on the testimony of a lying drunken thieving violent black whore who was trying to talk her way out of a yet another charge of violent drunken assault in a long history of violent drunken assaults and stupid violent thefts, believes that blacks have right to chimp out on whites because all whites are guilty of racism, believe that whites make Africa and Detroit poor, and that if only whites were eliminated other races would have all the stuff that whites have.
That was implicit in the arguments we heard for the guilt of Zimmerman, and implicit in the arguments we heard for the premature conviction of the Duke Lacrosse team.
Pretty much everyone who has been educated in Harvard believes that if only whites were eliminated other races would have all the stuff that whites have.
When Obama says "You did not build that", what near fifty percent of the voters hear is that wealth just springs forth from the magic dirt, and due to racism, white people get it all.
When the BLM burns down a supermarket that whites built and beats up the whites that built it, and that supermarket is not promptly replaced by a supermarket run by black women that gives out stuff for free, they think that the reason they were not given a supermarket the way white males supposedly were given ("You did not build that") is racism.
They are outraged and indignant that they do not get a new supermarket the way that Obama told them whites got a new supermarket.
That is the worldview taught in Harvard, and its logical implication is that all whites should be murdered.
Harvard, and Obama, preach slogans that like "liquidation of the kulaks as a class" preserve a careful ambiguity between erasing white culture and civilization, and erasing whites physically. Harvard engages in symbolic acts erasing white civilization, but when these symbolic acts get down to their vote bank, the mass of the voters hear Harvard instigating the physical erasure of whites, that the physical erasure of whites is desirable and morally right.
And to top it off, when someone such as myself speaks a desire for "racial strength", "white pride" or "desire for an ethnostate", the universal response is one of:
- check your privilege!
Every soul is privileged to be born into the family and region in which they are born.
The diversity of rich experiences around the world bodes well for souls who might grow, learn and or develop as souls, wrt the experiences they have in their lives.
True diversity would be lost if homogeneity were to become omnipresent. This "dire diversity dichotomy" is never acknowledged by The Left.
- you racist pig!
The will to live according to ones own inner direction, ones own personal authority and preferences, can never be entirely extinguished by any external regime, no matter how gilded the Lefties paint their particular picture of an homogeneous pampered utopia.
- repeat after me, "I am NOT oppressed"!
The desire of some humans to impose their will on other humans, appears to know no limits.
To truly respect the will of another, requires giving full acknowledgement or "credit" to his right to have a say in EVERY thing he is called upon to support or to oppose, to participate in or to "be taken to tacitly support" (the insidious expression of "modern democratic states").
Every 'Western' country MUST have open borders, except for Israel of course. And DARE anyone speak of such horrible biases in the collective public conversation.
Zenaan
It is true that in the discussion of any particular existential problem which has been created by the "government" of the day, we often find ourselves hopelessly bound into the parameters of discussion (and parameters of solution) implied by that "government of the day".
This is not necessarily in our interest.
But neither is it in our interest to disregard solutions to problems, and the modulo of time (expediency, and looming 'disaster') that we find ourselves within.
Aka, you got a brain, use it.
Z
