White and Wrong in Philly (Selwyn Duke)

When your article inspires a big-city mayor to refer your case to a "human-relations commission," you know you've hit a nerve. And when that article is the recent "Being White in Philly" piece by liberal Robert Huber, you know it doesn't take much truth to hit that nerve.

That's the scary part. Huber's article contains mostly tepid examples of whites' negative experiences with blacks and primarily black neighborhoods, such as a Philadelphia resident whose grill was stolen from her backyard but "blames herself" for not fencing it in. Its tone is basically apologetic, absolving a drug dealer of responsibility because he was just "trying to get by" and describing the US' racial history as "horrible and daunting." Yet this wasn't good enough for Mayor Michael Nutter and his comrades. They still want Huber silenced.

Oh, they won't get what they want...at least not exactly and not yet. But, nonetheless, writes Philly.com, "In a scathing letter, Mayor Nutter last week requested that the Philadelphia Human Relations Commission consider whether the magazine and Huber deserved to be rebuked for the article." Why is this significant? Well, when we hear about Englishmen, Canadians, Australians, Swedes, or other Westerners being imprisoned or fined for criticizing Islam or homosexuality -- yes, this does happen -- guess what the instruments of their oppression are.

Of course, they're usually called "human-rights" commissions, and the entities that actually judge those charged with "hate speech" are called "tribunals." And they have proliferated in the West. You can bet your state has one, and your county may, too. But, no, you won't be silenced by them -- at least not exactly and not yet. We have that pesky thing called the First Amendment (for now).

But Huber certainly was rebuked. In a Monday panel discussion moderated by the...

the left doesn’t like any of the amendments in the Bill of Rights

. . . or much of anything else in the actual Constitution.
You would think that “the press” would favor the First Amendment, but you would be wrong. In reality the telegraph, as employed by the wire services (really by the AP, but it is the inevitable effect of any and all wire services), has politically homogenized the nation’s journalists against the Constitution. Adam Smith predicts the effect perfectly:
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Wealth of Nations, Book I, Ch 10

The AP newswire is nothing other than a continuous virtual meeting of journalists which has been going on since the middle of the Nineteenth Century. Nothing else could have been expected to come of it, than that the members of the AP should, at least, tacitly, enter into "a conspiracy against the public.”

The AP has always been monopolistic in its practices, and was found to be in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act back in 1945. It systematically suppressed competitors. But beyond that, it created a “pecking order" in journalism with itself and go-along-to-get-along journalists at the top, and truly independent journalists at the bottom.
It thereby made questioning the objectivity of its members into a taboo subject. Well, under the Constitution, Hillary had a point:
I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "We are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!”
Just so, we are Americans and we should question the objectivity of journalists, whether it is the Associated Press or Edward R. Murrow or any journalist! And don’t let anyone claim that journalists know so much more than the rest of us do - they know little smatterings of things that the rest of will find out soon enough, if we care about them! And if we really care about them, we are likely to find out about them faster over the Internet than we will from a member of the AP!
And we can test their historical track record - and frankly, it stinks! Whether it was the reality of Soviet penetration of the US government under the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, or whether it was the basis of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth - or the malicious Nifong persecution of the Duke Lacrosse Three or the malicious persecution of white Republicans under the aegis of the baseless prosecution of “white” George Zimmerman, journalism systematically oversells itself and devalues the people who get things done.

I hear you Tupelo. Everything a white republican says today is racist.

I am copying what I wrote on a previous post but it is applicable here too.

“Honey, I’d rather have hot dogs tonight instead of Mexican” RACIST

“Not a fan of that Rap Song” RACIST

“They should bench (Black QB), he’s playing lousy” RACIST.

The above is all the masses here 24/7 from the MSM and the Left Side and its all they will ever hear.

I met a black man at the local shooting range the other day. He self identified himself as a “Republican who escaped from Chicago.” We share many life experiences including black powder shooting.
In another world, we could probably become close friends but in a world where I have to walk on eggshells and be very careful in what I say or do, I am not sure.
Really a quandary.

It's a shame that we cannot talk about these problems realistically. Your friend showed that not all Blacks think the same although it is disturbing that he is in the minority when we see that 90% plus still think the same and generally have a "hate Whitey/America" (or whatever you want to call it). I think it would be wise for him to open up and address these issues because if something should blow, the only thing worse than being White and/or a person who is a producer to the 90% plus as a Black person who "gets it" because he is doing the "White Man thing" and seen as a sellout.

It's really bad that we have these race pimps out there shilling the same stuff for generations thinking it is still 1955. Yes, back then, the Blacks did have legitimate gripes, but we have made great progress since then. It isn't perfect but nothing really is, but to keep their influence, the race pimps act like it is 1955. We have a Black President, at least one that passes for one and that he identifies himself as that way. You would think that would clam things, bring people together and show that a Black man can be elected (well, selected, whatever) and make it to the top. I know things have been brewing for a long time but I think with the election of Bronco Bama, race relations have been kicked back to 1965 or even 1935 in many instances so I do understand your hesitation. Still your friend should realize who his true friends are because the 90% Plussers will see him as a traitor unfortunately.

I may add that the welfare state has done a lot of more harm to the Black family than even the Klan ever did.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.