Extracting the Poison From White Racism: How to defuse white nationalism's growing appeal

New York Times ^ | 12-14-02 | Felecia R. Lee

[CatoRenasci]

'Manifest Destiny' was simply an idea, perhaps appropriate in its time. You speak of it as some sort of objective reality or condition which must exist at present. I don't think the concept has any use in the present circumstances, and is misleading given its earlier connotations.

[xm177e2]

Nationalism is more than just pride, it is a political/ideological form of that pride.

[PatrioticAmerican]

The Black Nationalists certainly get away with their racism.

[wayoverontheright]

We need to move toward race-neutral affirmative-action policies and guarantee people a working wage.

"Guarantee people a living wage". Definitely a liberal socialist, but the points brought out in this article indicate that blacks finally are seeing the damage the law of unintended consequences has provided to them as a result of the race-consciousness and victimhood inherent in affirmative action. This day had to come.

The author seems to be overly concerned, I believe, with the danger to blacks from white nationalism, when the real damage is wreaked on the black populace through the acceptance of victimhood, and the severe psychological limitations victimhood inflicts.

[CatoRenasci]

Bingo!

[CatoRenasci]

I think Trent Lott should lead the national debate on race. If we're going to have a serious discussion, we need people to say what's on their minds.

This is one of the more perceptive points in the interview. I think the single greatest obstacle to progress in race relations in the United States is a lack of honesty, on both sides, in the debate. When whites are almost uniformly afraid to state their view candidly, how can minorities know how to react or interact? And many minorities long have used different strategies of masking behavior in dealing with whites.

Over the years, I have heard several blacks make this point, albeit not in a general way. As one black woman put it: "I'll take a Southerner over a Northerner any day. If the Southerner doesn't like you, he says so to your face. If he invites you in through the front door, he means it. With most Southerners, you know where you stand. You may not always like it, but you can deal with it. Up North, folks make nice to your face and call you [N-word] behind your back. You never know who's your friend and who'll stab your back."

The fundamental conditions to improved race relations, IMHO, are honesty and mutual respect. Without honesty, even candor, in discussions, mutual respect is probably impossible. The problem is our culture of victimization and desire to avoid offense. The truth is what blacks here from whites will sometimes be as unpleasant and offensive as what whites hear from blacks. To acknowledge feelings, which are complex and change over time, helps. To suppress and deny feelings in this context is only to let them fester and breed more resentment.

[puroresu]

What's basically occurring now is the culmination of liberal desires to replace American liberty with a socialist, centralized, one-party state.

The two main prongs of attack for destroying the American system of government have been judicial activism and immigration. The liberals decided many decades ago that the American people will never voluntarily vote for the one-party dictatorship the liberals desire. So phase one was to transfer as much power as possible out of the hands of the elected branches of government, and into the hands of liberal judges. The liberal media solidified liberal judicial power by declaring all their rulings to be holy scripture, landmarks that can never be overturned. Thus we had things such as busing, abortion, bans on school prayer, and many other liberal agenda items simply imposed upon us by judicial fiat.

But judical aggression would only get liberals so far. They knew that in the long run, they would simply have to replace the American people with another population, one which has no traditions of ordered liberty or Western concepts of the rule of law.

That's why the 1965 immigration law was passed. The goal of that law was to displace the existing population of the United States, and replace it with a different population. Once the third world immigration began to flow, the liberals replaced the old immigrant ideal of the melting pot and assimilation with one of multi-culturalism and diversity. In other words, new immigrants aren't supposed to assimilate. Rather, they're supposed to retain their national identities, languages, customs, etc.. They aren't supposed to adopt American ways and admire American traditions. Instead, they're taught that America has been an evil, oppressive, racist, sexist, homophobic regime. Our country, over time, will be Balkanized into racial and ethnic factions, which is exactly what liberals want.

California is the prototype for what the liberals want the entire country to become. The goal is very simple: Replace the existing population of the U.S. with a third world population which retains its identity, language, customs, and thus finds itself at odds with America itself. The assimilation ideals of the Ellis Island era are now gone, replaced by multi-culturalism and diversity. Unless something is done to stop this, the entire country will be Balkanized by 2050, and half the U.S. population will be people who hate our traditions and values.

[mhking]

BTW, Mike I mean absolutely no offense to you. I consider you a friend and I respect your intellect immensely.

None taken, my friend. I can appreciate what you're saying here, and quiet as it's kept, I, too, reach for the door locks and double check 'em when I enter certain urban areas. I ain't stupid, though some might say I look it...

[sauropod]

LOL! I resemble that remark ;-)

[Vigilantcitizen]

"I ain't stupid, though some might say I look it...

"I resemble that remark ;-)

Me too!

[sauropod]

True. I support the political/ideological form embodied in
"Braveheart." 'Pod

[adx]

"There is the projection that non-Hispanic whites will be the minority around the year 2050"

This angers me the most. It is the span of my lifetime. It reminds me of the Biblical story of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of Pottage.

The white minority after 2050 will continue to drop drastically from that point on. By 2100, when the population is projected to be about 800 million to one billion, the white population will be miniscule.

Try as I might to believe otherwise, I believe this is our likely fate. Calls for "tolerance" and "duh-versity" fall flat when you see places like Israel (which is slated to be demographically overwhelmed within its own borders), Kosovo (ethnic conflict aided by turning a blind eye to massive illegal immigration), Zimbabwe (where whites for all practical purposes are becoming an actively hunted minority), and South Africa (which isn't too far behind Zimbabwe). Europe is in its pre-Islamic period right now, since they're going to be demographically overwhelmed like Israel. From the looks of it, Western Civ is going down and likely for good, due to sheer numbers, if nothing else.

With this in mind, I believe this professor is right when she says that whites increasingly feel like an embattled group. The real danger will come in ignoring their concerns, especially if we see the beginnings of ethnic violence in this country and we see that the government can't or won't do anything about it. If whites feel that literally every non-white is out to get them, chances are that they'll turn to a leadership that will tell them exactly what they want to hear. How does the prospect of a mega-Yugoslavia with nuclear weapons sound? Especially if you've got a group that listens to a demagogic figure that has some of them as a trump card? And even worse, they're in a situation that won't allow otherwise level-headed, well-meaning people to defuse this, because of the racial animosity that's been building up?

As for me personally, this is the reason why I believe that we have to stop illegal immigration, like yesterday. This is also why the pro-illegal crowd calling people racists for wanting to control our borders cut no ice with me. If we don't have an honest discussion and action to stop this soon, it'll give the real racists the opening they need to exploit, and a bitter, embattled populace that will listen seriously to them. May G-d help us, and non-whites, if that backlash turns violent.

[mhking]

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[RooRoobird14]

I agree with most of what the professor has to say here. However, in the last Q&A, the suggestion is that non-Blacks (sick of incessant whining/race-baiting/hate speech by leftist blacks) are somehow overall morphing into the KKK is wrong.

It's clear to most non-blacks in America that the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP consist mainly of black racists and bigots who regularly engage in hate speech and are never held accountable. It's that kind of stridency in politics that's fostered a new kind of "racism" by non-blacks which is NOT based on skin color, but the result of open hostility and contempt shown by black leaders and politicians towards non-blacks who don't march in lock-step with their extremist agenda.

Plus, I'm sorry to say, blacks as an ethnic group overall have morphed into a terrible stereotype that happens to be true: 70% illegitimacy rate, 12% of the population responsible for 40% of all abortions, 12% of the population representing 35%-40% of the welfare rolls, etc. I know I've reached a point of exasperation where I just shrug my shoulders and think "Let Julian Bond, Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters and their followers scream all they want. Most of the problems blacks face today are due to a lack of personal responsibility. Until they begin to acknowledge their own role in the sorry state of their community, I just don't give a d@mn anymore."