Posted on 01/12/2020 1:26:00 PM PST by blam
The once prestigious Lancet medical journal has published a bizarre book review asserting that “white Americans continue to mobilise to maintain or extend the exclusive advantages whiteness offers those who can become white.”
The Lancet selected Rhea W. Boyd, a Minority Health Policy Fellow at Harvard’s School of Public Health, to review a 2019 book called Dying of Whiteness by Jonathan Metzl, whose thesis is that “right-wing backlash policies have mortal consequences — even for the white voters they promise to help.”
In his book, Metzl argues that white mortality is up in the United States ever since the 2016 election of Donald Trump, since in order to “maintain an imagined place atop a racial hierarchy,” white Americans who harbor “racial resentment” support policies that seem to limit the freedoms or resources available to non-whites, even though such decisions threaten their own wellbeing as well.
“From expansive gun legislation to broad divestment in government programmes, Metzl characterises white liberties that endanger white lives or imperil white futures as ‘dying of whiteness,’” Boyd observes.
While in her review Boyd fundamentally agrees with Metzl’s contentions, she believes that he is too soft on whites by attributing whites’ self-destructive white political actions to “racial resentment,” which “erases white agency through emotional euphemism.”
“At times, Metzl artfully articulates and historicises the racist origins of white interest in firearm fanaticism and ‘small government’ politics,” Boyd writes. “At others, he turns to ‘racial anxieties,’ racially charged ‘fears,’ or ‘racial resentment’ to describe white people’s political investment in white racial dominance.”
Boyd decries the “common practice” of mis-attributing “white self-destruction and violence to psychological states” or obscuring “the impacts of defending whiteness through emotional euphemisms.”
Drivers of white mortality such as suicide, chronic liver disease, and drug and alcohol poisoning have been described as...
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Dear Rhea,
I’m not “white”, I’m AMERICAN. Beotch.
albinos are offended
If you get rid of the white people who is going to feed the black people? Zimbabwe had that problem.
Seems as a man Lancet should strive for self control of his Bigotry instead of embracing Hitlers “final solution” methodology.
Racism against Whites is not only acceptable to the left, i’s encouraged.
“historicises”
Laughable crap.
b-but out of touch boomers told me demographics aren’t destiny.
I remember reading an op ed in the 80s/90s wherein the author predicted this headline from the simple existence of affirmative action. Seems like a bit of a stretch at the time...
This is all rooted in conflict theory, a sociological model that states progress in society only happens through a mechanism of conflict. The theory was and is popular with socialists and communists, as it easily fits into their worldview. The problem with the theory is when progress happens minus the high level conflict that the theory expounds. Not a problem for commies and socialists because if there is no conflict, they will either pretend there is a conflict, as with the above bovine excrement. Or they will simply create conflict. They see themselves as the “agents of change” when they are just agents of chaos, hatred , and destruction.
CC
The author "is" so-called "black". Also obviously an affirmative-action hire in an affirmative-action-created position.
They certainly fear whites. The world will never be as they desire.
Rhea Boyd is a black woman who appears to hate whites.
Nah I’m still racist, they’re worthless animals that have destroyed many cities that were once nice.
Oh wait. 15 percent are “good”.
That’s some percentage.
He’s got the right idea but the wrong group.
There’s never been a bigger blight on the American landscape than the black male.
There can be no more racist doctrine than the belief that an entire race is evil.
It follows logically from affirmative action. If 60 years of affirmative action haven’t fixed the problem, then there are only two likely reasons:
A) there is a vast conspiracy by whites to keep black people down, which can only be stopped by the elimination of the white race, or
B) there is a statistically large difference in ability between whites and blacks, which is genetic in origin, and cannot be fixed.
Only one of these possibilities is acceptable to the left.
For those of you who tend to respond to stuff like this with “We’re not the racists - you’re the racist!!” I would like to suggest to you that “racism” isn’t a real thing, in the sense that it is some disease that needs to be cured, as if the natural state of man is to be free of any and all prejudices against other men. The truth is that the natural state of man is to have a preference for those he sees as “his people” and have suspicion, distrust, or even hatred for those he sees as “the other”. This is simple tribalism, and EVERY SINGLE GROUP OF MEN IN THE WORLD HAS THIS IN-BORN CHARACTERISTIC. Given that truth, “racism” is not a condition which afflicts only the evil, anymore than the need for defecation is a condition of only the sick.
Now that this innate function of the nature of Man has been weaponized by the Left, what is being called “racism” is simply the proper functioning and habitation of a society by the people who built that society.
If we look at Sweden as an example, it was once a country full of no one but Swedes, and they built a well-run country which functioned well according to Swedish rules and cultural norms. People were secure and prosperous as could be expected, and saw no reason for any fundamental change. Leftists, who by their very nature want to destroy well-functioning societies, had no choice: since the resident Swedes wouldn’t accept their desire for change, they would have to bring in masses of people who would, thus the push for mass immigration of non-Swedes, whose cultural values and RACIAL DIFFERENCES made them incompatible with Swedish norms.
Now, at some point, Swedes would normally wake up and say “Hey, we don’t have anything against other peoples, but this is our country and we want it to remain Swedish and function as we built it.” This is an obstacle for Leftists, so to solve it, they invented “racism”, among other things. They created a “disease” with the greatest stigma possible, so that the mere whiff of accusation is enough to make people run and hide.
If a Swede objects to the dismantling of his culture: racist! If he objects to mass rape of Swedish women: racist! If he complains that there are thugs roaming the once-safe streets: racist! If he objects to the masses of invaders that live off of free housing and welfare that he pays for: racist! If he objects to his entire country and culture being stolen, dismantled and spat on in front of his eyes: racist!
Thus, by the paralyzing stigma of an invented “disease” the Swede curls up into a ball while his entire civilization is stolen, and the entire history of his people is wiped out. A Swede merely wanting Swedes to be supreme in the country they built, is called “white supremacy”.
This is no different than if you built a house for your family, and some squatters moved in and ate your food and destroyed your furniture, and when you objected they screamed “racist!” so you fled, in shame, from the house that YOU BUILT, homeless, starving and cold, while the squatters burned your family’s pictures and put theirs up instead, while eating your food and sleeping in your bed.
Think about that the next time you give weight to this concept of “racism”.
Divide and conquer. The quintessential methodology of sinister people. First, divide the people into groups. Into one or two go all of the people who are nonproductive, resentful, self-pitying, ungrateful, lazy, full of rage. Into the other, go the hard working producers, the upright, courageous, defenders and upholders of society. Brand group 3 as racists, reactionaries, greedy, insane. Next, empower and privilege groups 1 and 2 and stir up the most evil passions in them and point their evil thinking, vengeance seeking, paranoia, and rage at the third group—the scapegoats who deserve to suffer..
I think there is another very likely reason. Affirmative action helps some people, but really just becomes a way for elites to maintain control by selectively conferring benefits on some people.
Improving education, promoting positive family values, and encouraging small businesses and independence among poor communities would have worked much better. But success for African Americans is not what the liberals wanted. They wanted dependency and control.
He was initially asked about Black History Month. He is quoted as saying that the concept of a month dedicated to black history is "ridiculous...I don't want a black history month. Black history is American history."
He then went on to say that the only way to get rid of racism is to just "stop talking about it," adding that the labels "black" and "white" are an obstacle to beating racism.
"I am going to stop calling you a white man (to the interviewer) and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man," Freeman said.
(me speaking) As a society, we dwell on racism so much that it has become a cottage industry for many. Case in point, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. Take the topic out of the conversation and the politics and people will talk about something else.
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.