This satire explains why the British Empire failed.
They also shed a great deal of light on why Whites behave they way They do today.
Wednesday 30 August 2006
Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One
This satire explains why the British Empire failed.
They also shed a great deal of light on why Whites behave they way They do today.
They also shed a great deal of light on why Whites behave they way They do today.
Sunday 27 August 2006
Failing to confront the enemy within
(2006)
RESPONSE TO ABOVE EDITORIAL:
Regarding your racist editorial "Failing to confront the enemy within" (13 August 2006, the 'most pressing problem facing the country' is the white man's belief that when his life is threatened all other priorities instantly become secondary.
Where is the evidence that Muslims 'hate the country of their birth' rather than simply white racism? To claim that 'Islamophobia in non-Muslim Britain' is less important than 'civil liberties' is to justify that form of racial hatred. It is also to evade the issue that Islamophobia is the root of Islamist terrorists.
By claiming 'young Muslim men' are 'radicalised after exposure to extreme Islamist elements' again evades the issue that the radicalisation of the darker-skinned is quintessentially predicated on white racism.
The white racist's evasion of the essentially racist nature of white culture is expressed when he claims that said culture is based upon 'its own traditional values of decency [pretending that what's above the navel is good & that what's below is sinful], responsibility [blaming the other guy for his failure to live up to those responsibilities we pass off on to him], self-discipline [emotional repression leading to violent attacks on others], hard work [a substitute for a fulfilling personal-life], respect for others [as long as those others are white & agree with us without demur] and the carefully constructed freedoms of liberal democracy [carefully-constructed for whites]'. Only whites ever make such claims about how wonderful they are; those framed to be on the receiving end of the so-called superiority of white culture know better. Whites know this, hence their desire to exploit political-correctness as a means of overcoming their racist guilt and shame.
It's always interesting to note that the Catholicism, which was used to nurture IRA terrorists, was never demonised as cruel and inhuman. Additionally, no mention is made of the politically-correct attempts to buy-off the IRA (& the Catholic minority) in Northern Ireland in order to achieve "peace in our time" there. Funny how white terrorists are always treated better than brown ones!
The basic reason white culture is in decline is because their imperial projects failed – as they always do – and white racists have found no adequate replacement to hold their increasingly fractured societies together – except hatred of foreigners with dark skin. But such racist loathing was precisely why the British Empire failed – because to hate others is to ultimately hate oneself.
You mention – in passing – the 'ghettoisation of immigrants and religious minorities' but never apportion blame for this on white racism, although you thereby contradict yourself by claiming whites take responsibility for their actions. Clearly, however, whites never take responsibility for their racism.
Your paranoia is revealed when you refuse to use the word "alleged" when discussing the British government's recent claim of having foiled, through arrest, an alleged series of terrorist atrocities. This is very poor journalism since it reveals your belief that to release all suspects without charge (& they are suspects, not convicts) would be the 'final humiliation' for the white race regardless of issues of innocence or guilt.
Clearly, you believe that being a Muslim should be criminalized.
You claim that 'nobody had suggested' that these arrests were an 'attack on the Muslim "community" [there is such a thing, using quotation marks won't make it go away as much as you'd like]'. This completely evades the issue that the police have been shown to be institutionally racist and would like nothing more than to continue to abuse ethnic minorities with the laws' arms around them. It is not the suggestion but the action itself suggesting these arrests are racially motivated. You contradict yourself by claiming that a pattern of Islamic fundamentalism is emerging for all to see (even the 'wilfully blind'), yet refuse to accept that Muslims also see the pattern of white racism against them going back decades - Islamophobia.
If the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not 'anti-Muslim military campaigns', then what were they? There was no reason to topple Saddam Hussein; especially since erstwhile Western sanctions were killing more people than he was. Nor did the alleged purging of Afghanistan have any meaningful long-term depressing effect on terrorist activity. Such wars merely gave Western governments the delusion that something useful was being done about a problem that was largely of their making.
The fact is that most terrorism is fully justified as a means of military response to genuine attack. Whites use it just as much as anyone else and they're hypocritical to say otherwise. That they do so is a measure not of the failure of so-called political elites to confront the alleged enemy within, but of their fundamental realisation that – like the IRA – terrorists are almost impossible to defeat. They are our Frankenstein, and to defeat terrorists means to destroy part or all of ourselves because they come from us. Hence, the recent attempts at a significant diminution of UK civil liberties and the exacerbated racist-paranoia resulting therefrom. A war on terror must, by definition, use terror as a means; meaning that the issue is not an end to terrorists but a simple answer to the question of who is the most terrifying. This editorial demonstrates that we are the most terrified and have already lost this war.
The only way to defeat terrorists in the end is to stop creating them; prevention being better than the placebo offered here. Although 'institutional political correctness' is a bad thing, it is better than the institutional racism you falsely pit it against. It offers blacks more legal rights than whites that, in a racist country like the UK, is only a fair and proper rebalancing of things.
Saturday 26 August 2006
Top-down integration debate doomed to failure
(2006)
RESPONSE TO ABOVE PRESS RELEASE:
As doomed to failure as 'multiculturalism' itself is, in fact.
Multiculturalism posits the lie that one country can have many cultures. If so, then why have countries at all?
'Ask ordinary people about multiculturalism and they'll tell you about good examples of interaction between different communities - of celebrating diversity. Interculturalism is a fact of life'. Sounds good, doesn't it? Problem is, of course, that none of these 'good examples' are given here! Why not? Answer: Because they don't exist except in the febrile imaginings of anti-racist scumbags. "Interculturalism", like "multiculturalism", is a word that points to an empty concept and a non-existent phenomenon (a lot like the word "God", really.)
'What we are very bad at is putting in place policies to force the public and private sectors to stop discriminating against Black communities in employment, education, health, housing, education, (Sic) and every other area of life'. It's impossible to force anyone to stop from discriminating against others: You cannot legislate for love. If it were, the UK class-war would've ended decades ago. (Incidentally, this is why UK Socialists had to become more Conservative in order to be elected. They had to ditch Their poorer supporters because there is, in fact, nothing that can be done for the poor that they cannot do for themselves, given enough self-motivation.)
The fact that there are no laws against discriminating on the grounds of social-class proves that Whites don't feel They need to hand a sop to the poor. The existence of anti-racist legislation (although not anti-racism laws, notice) proves that Whites want to exploit Black racial-insecurities and pretend to be helping Blacks. In exactly the same way that social welfare (which keeps poor people poor) is used to give the impression that Whites care about poverty and the poor when, in fact, they care about neither.
In truth, all that you can do against any form of discrimination is to punish it AFTER the event - if you can demonstrate its occurrence. By claiming otherwise, Blacks claim the non-existent right to live in a protected world where They – especially – are subject to particular protection, BEFORE the event, which no other group (particularly the lower class) possesses. Nice work, if you can get it!
'The 1990 Trust believes that the focus should be on the causes of extremism, foreign policy and impact of anti-terror measures, not just on its consequences'. Although there is much truth here, the problem lies in the means of expression, particularly the word "causes".
The cause of all existential phenomena is choice. There is no other. If a man chooses to be a terrorist, he has chosen to be so and no amount of special pleading will protect him from the fact that this is so. He cannot, therefore, claim that he had no discipline over his own actions and/or that he couldn't help himself. The proof of this is that most Muslims choose not to become terrorists. To say otherwise helps Whites justify Their racism and Islamophobia; a clear case of Blacks shooting Themselves in the foot.
Once you start treating human beings as if they were mice in a laboratory experiment who will always behave in predictable ways given the same stimuli, you fall into the same trap White Racist Scientists fall into. They talk about genes for this kind of behaviour and genes for that. The issue isn't genetic; it's a matter of personal responsibility – which few people are prepared to take – especially by those who claim human behaviour is caused by anything other than free, personal choice. Such a negative view attempts to undermine our humanity exactly as racism tries to.
Black Culture has an inbuilt political inability to avoid falling into the same racist-in-principle arguments that Whites traditionally employ to justify Their claim to superior treatment. This is why the race-war will never end because it's not designed as a war to end racism, but to finally determine which race is the superior. A flawed endeavour, of course, because the answer is neither; meaning that the race-war is, itself, racist.
Ruhul Tarafder, from The 1990 Trust, said: 'How are we going to integrate communities when the global families of those very communities are being blown up daily in Iraq, Afghanistan and most recently in Lebanon?' The truth is that racial integration is an impossible dream precisely for the reason Mr Tarafder states. That is, that the various races are, and always have been, at war with one another – and always will be. How and why could it be otherwise? In this context, Whites demand complete, unswerving and undivided loyalty to Them. They will accept nothing else or label Muslims as the Enemy Within. This means Muslims can't integrate into a culture that effectively demands They renounce Islam. (Even if Muslims did take such a drastic step, Whites would never believe the renunciation sincere. They'd assume it was only done to curry political favour with Whites on the racist assumption that Muslims will continue to practice their faith in secret.)
'What is required is a commission to look at how these policies has (Sic) resulted in radicalising thousands of young people.
'In addition, the BNP has 50 councillors and racist attacks are rising. If we are looking at people who do not integrate, maybe that could be a starting point'. This would certainly be an excellent 'starting point'. However, care should be exercised in admitting that 'thousands of young people' have become radicalised. That would be tantamount to admitting that Whites are right to think in terms of an Enemy Within and that racial abuse of that Enemy is, therefore, fully justified. A clear equality must be established between White Extremists and Black, in order to prove that both are equally capable of "extremism". Otherwise, Whites will simply claim that Their extremists aren't that extreme. And that, anyway, White Extremists will continue to be protected by the vacuous free-speech theorising of: I disapprove of what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say it. Better to let Whites die for Their beliefs than Blacks if Whites really believe such nonsense.
As doomed to failure as 'multiculturalism' itself is, in fact.
Multiculturalism posits the lie that one country can have many cultures. If so, then why have countries at all?
'Ask ordinary people about multiculturalism and they'll tell you about good examples of interaction between different communities - of celebrating diversity. Interculturalism is a fact of life'. Sounds good, doesn't it? Problem is, of course, that none of these 'good examples' are given here! Why not? Answer: Because they don't exist except in the febrile imaginings of anti-racist scumbags. "Interculturalism", like "multiculturalism", is a word that points to an empty concept and a non-existent phenomenon (a lot like the word "God", really.)
'What we are very bad at is putting in place policies to force the public and private sectors to stop discriminating against Black communities in employment, education, health, housing, education, (Sic) and every other area of life'. It's impossible to force anyone to stop from discriminating against others: You cannot legislate for love. If it were, the UK class-war would've ended decades ago. (Incidentally, this is why UK Socialists had to become more Conservative in order to be elected. They had to ditch Their poorer supporters because there is, in fact, nothing that can be done for the poor that they cannot do for themselves, given enough self-motivation.)
The fact that there are no laws against discriminating on the grounds of social-class proves that Whites don't feel They need to hand a sop to the poor. The existence of anti-racist legislation (although not anti-racism laws, notice) proves that Whites want to exploit Black racial-insecurities and pretend to be helping Blacks. In exactly the same way that social welfare (which keeps poor people poor) is used to give the impression that Whites care about poverty and the poor when, in fact, they care about neither.
In truth, all that you can do against any form of discrimination is to punish it AFTER the event - if you can demonstrate its occurrence. By claiming otherwise, Blacks claim the non-existent right to live in a protected world where They – especially – are subject to particular protection, BEFORE the event, which no other group (particularly the lower class) possesses. Nice work, if you can get it!
'The 1990 Trust believes that the focus should be on the causes of extremism, foreign policy and impact of anti-terror measures, not just on its consequences'. Although there is much truth here, the problem lies in the means of expression, particularly the word "causes".
The cause of all existential phenomena is choice. There is no other. If a man chooses to be a terrorist, he has chosen to be so and no amount of special pleading will protect him from the fact that this is so. He cannot, therefore, claim that he had no discipline over his own actions and/or that he couldn't help himself. The proof of this is that most Muslims choose not to become terrorists. To say otherwise helps Whites justify Their racism and Islamophobia; a clear case of Blacks shooting Themselves in the foot.
Once you start treating human beings as if they were mice in a laboratory experiment who will always behave in predictable ways given the same stimuli, you fall into the same trap White Racist Scientists fall into. They talk about genes for this kind of behaviour and genes for that. The issue isn't genetic; it's a matter of personal responsibility – which few people are prepared to take – especially by those who claim human behaviour is caused by anything other than free, personal choice. Such a negative view attempts to undermine our humanity exactly as racism tries to.
Black Culture has an inbuilt political inability to avoid falling into the same racist-in-principle arguments that Whites traditionally employ to justify Their claim to superior treatment. This is why the race-war will never end because it's not designed as a war to end racism, but to finally determine which race is the superior. A flawed endeavour, of course, because the answer is neither; meaning that the race-war is, itself, racist.
Ruhul Tarafder, from The 1990 Trust, said: 'How are we going to integrate communities when the global families of those very communities are being blown up daily in Iraq, Afghanistan and most recently in Lebanon?' The truth is that racial integration is an impossible dream precisely for the reason Mr Tarafder states. That is, that the various races are, and always have been, at war with one another – and always will be. How and why could it be otherwise? In this context, Whites demand complete, unswerving and undivided loyalty to Them. They will accept nothing else or label Muslims as the Enemy Within. This means Muslims can't integrate into a culture that effectively demands They renounce Islam. (Even if Muslims did take such a drastic step, Whites would never believe the renunciation sincere. They'd assume it was only done to curry political favour with Whites on the racist assumption that Muslims will continue to practice their faith in secret.)
'What is required is a commission to look at how these policies has (Sic) resulted in radicalising thousands of young people.
'In addition, the BNP has 50 councillors and racist attacks are rising. If we are looking at people who do not integrate, maybe that could be a starting point'. This would certainly be an excellent 'starting point'. However, care should be exercised in admitting that 'thousands of young people' have become radicalised. That would be tantamount to admitting that Whites are right to think in terms of an Enemy Within and that racial abuse of that Enemy is, therefore, fully justified. A clear equality must be established between White Extremists and Black, in order to prove that both are equally capable of "extremism". Otherwise, Whites will simply claim that Their extremists aren't that extreme. And that, anyway, White Extremists will continue to be protected by the vacuous free-speech theorising of: I disapprove of what you say, but will fight to the death for your right to say it. Better to let Whites die for Their beliefs than Blacks if Whites really believe such nonsense.
Friday 25 August 2006
No Way to Tackle Extremism, Ruth Kelly
RESPONSE TO ABOVE PRESS RELEASE:
'Black-led human rights organisation The 1990 Trust believe the initiative is the wrong answer to the question of citizenship'. This so-called question is really a statement. It implies that it's "Citizenship" which helps that abstraction we call "Society" cohere, when it's really allowing people to pursue their self-interest that does.
All rational men will be loyal to a society of self-interest simply because it's in their self-interest to do so: This will automatically create coherence. Claiming citizenship is the problem is to put the cart-before-the-horse when the problem is that at present no-one has any real vested-interest in being loyal to a culture that doesn't put their self-interest at its heart. And no rational entity ever works for the self-interest of others as well as they do for their own.
This is simple human nature – and a society not based on human nature needs to enforce citizenship by law and propaganda - as the former communist regimes had to. (It should be noted that all these failed as societies. And for good reason.)
Karen Chouhan, 1990 Trust trustee: 'The government needs to stop viewing Black communities as the problem, which is simply not true when you consider the contribution we make to society and the efforts we put in to get on'. This comment is entirely irrelevant and falls into a White Racist Trap. White Racists don't view Blacks in terms of Their achievements but in terms of Their skin colour. This, White Racists believe, allows Them to exploit that coloration as a signifier of genetic inferiority. No matter what Blacks achieve, Whites will always treat them as inferiors. Whites are always going to consider 'Black communities' as a problem simply because They are Black, not because of attempts to integrate or contributing to wider society.
Such naive and ignorant comments concerning the nature of White Racism betray the stupid and idiotic view that appealing to Their reason can appease Whites. And yet racism is a largely unreasonable viewpoint; proving that Blacks such as these are merely sucking-up-to, and effectively apologising for, White Racism. Such Blacks can't stand on Their own two feet and need Whites to help Them; proving that They are, indeed, as inferior as White Racists claim Them to be.
‘...[T]he minister should be looking at far-right extremism, and how their agenda of attacking multiculturalism and immigration has made it to mainstream thinking, and what effect this is having on community relations'. '...[A]ttacking multiculturalism and immigration' has always been 'mainstream thinking' in the White communities. How else can you explain, for example, the British Empire, the North Atlantic Slave Trade, racist immigration controls and the existence of the BNP (British national party)?
What is called here 'far-right extremism' is simply the tip of a racist iceberg; proving again that Blacks think They can blame White Extremists for the racism They experience. There's no meaningful difference between this and Whites thinking They can blame Muslim Extremists for Their endemic White Fear of Muslims. Both groups are equally racist in Their mutual desire to scapegoat someone who isn't Themselves, so what's the difference? The truth is that – in essentials - there isn't one. Both groups want to control men's minds for political gain and for political expediency – to line Their own pockets in so doing.
‘Nobody has tried harder than Black communities to integrate'. The truth here is that 'Black communities' have – instead - tried very hard to buy-off the protection racket that is White Racism by trying very hard to renounce Their own culture and act White. This is not integration, it's arse-kissing servitude.
'The issue is the fact that society as a whole continues to discriminate against them'. Yes, of course: It always will. There is no reason for it to adopt any other approach since Blacks offer no alternative and Whites can't conceive of culture without self-interest being its basis. All that can be done is to show Whites that it's not in Their self-interest to continue being racist – but no Black ever does this. Blacks Themselves can't imagine a culture not based on racism because Blacks are just as racist as Whites, and are simply blaming Whites for Their own racist tendencies.
'Let’s look at why surveys find 9 out of 10 white people do not have a Black friend, or why 4 out of 10 white people do not want a Black neighbour. This is the problem with citizenship and integration today'. These are not the problems, themselves – merely proofs that White Culture is endemically racist. When one starts considering the evidence one has of a given phenomena as the problem, then one can easily start to think that the solution is simply to hide or destroy the evidence. Whites already do this and Blacks are trying to do just the same by evading the actual problem.
Friendship is chosen. One doesn't want friends foisted upon one because that merely leads to resentment – not friendship. Only the lonely think otherwise. In any case, there aren't enough Blacks (only 8% of the UK population, after all) to go around for every white to have at least one black friend.
Again, if Whites don't want Black neighbours then that's Their preference – to which They are fully entitled so long as it's merely an expressed preference and is not legally-enforced. A man of self-respect wouldn't want to live where he's not wanted. This is why we have countries and communities, in the first place. So those of a like mind can then congregate together and enjoy each other's company and not be offended by the presence of those one considers undesirable – for whatever reason. Such preferences can only affect Blacks if Blacks actually want Whites to like Them. And if They want that, then They truly possess the desperation of the constitutionally lonely. '...[T]he problem with citizenship and integration today' is that political airheads think these things can be forced upon the citizens. This is communist totalitarianism, not liberty and justice. Do Blacks really believe that They can force Whites to legislate for love? If They do, then perhaps Whites are right to section proportionately-more Blacks than Whites under the present Mental Health Act since love is, by its nature, a voluntary act?
'The 1990 Trust believes that Ruth Kelly (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government DCLG) should be turning her attention to tackling the root causes of race inequality instead of problematizing Black communities'. Yes, but 'problematizing Black communities' is easier to achieve for the same reason that it's easier to hate a man than to love him. And why would Whites not take the path-of-least-resistance and do what's easiest? Blacks certainly wouldn't!
The 'root causes of race inequality' are that it's easier to hate than to love and that it's easier to blame others than accept personal responsibility. Blacks do this every bit as much as Whites do, the hypocrites!
'What is needed is not another talking shop producing a report which sits on the shelf, but real action to tackle the problems identified by previous research'. Fine, so why don't Blacks take this action Themselves rather than waiting for Whites to do so? Answer: Because Blacks are dependent on Whites to accept Them as equals and would fear a White Racist Backlash should Blacks one day have the guts to go it alone and be successful on Their own Black terms. (Emotionally-inadequate Blacks live in paranoid fear that if, in a racist culture, Blacks drives expensive cars, They'll always be the targets of invidious racist-abuse. To avoid finding-out if this is true or not, Blacks find it easier to be resolute social failures and then have the cheek to blame this on White Racism when the root cause is Their own fear of Whites. This merely produces the very racism They fear occurring.) So long as Blacks continue to choose-to-fail, They tacitly convince Whites that Blacks really are racially inferior and that inactive talking-shops (White Propaganda) are all that Blacks need be offered to keep Them quiet.
If Blacks chose-to-succeed, They'd find that Whites are more frightened of Them, than They could ever be of Whites. Whites know this, which is why They spend a great deal of time and money trying very hard to make Blacks fear Them. Whites do this mostly through foreign military adventures designed to make Blacks cack Their underpants in the presence of the allegedly God-like might of White Technology. That this doesn't work, annoys Whites no end because They have no other gambit.
'We know what the problems are: a failure to make real progress in creating true race equality in Britain, such as equal outcomes in employment, education, housing, health etc'. This is communist horse-manure because human beings are not created equal.
'The problems are not: they are not (Sic) due to a failure of Black communities to integrate. Instead (Sic) much of the blame must be laid at the failure of indigenous communities to willingly embrace multicultural Britain'. This is the same scapegoating this press release hypocritically accuses Whites of doing!
'With so many committees, commissions and toolkits - the delivery of race equality will drown in a managerialist framework that cramps resources and efforts into the managing of processes not outcomes'. More communist horseshit! Outcomes cannot be managed in the facile way envisaged here. If they could there'd be a helluva lot more happy parents with loving children following successful careers as a result of well-managed childhoods. In reality, we have (for example) fantastic abortion, teenage pregnancy, illiteracy and alcoholism rates; proving that most people's upbringings – no matter how well-managed – produced outcomes that rational men would not logically desire.
Stop whining; start living.
'Black-led human rights organisation The 1990 Trust believe the initiative is the wrong answer to the question of citizenship'. This so-called question is really a statement. It implies that it's "Citizenship" which helps that abstraction we call "Society" cohere, when it's really allowing people to pursue their self-interest that does.
All rational men will be loyal to a society of self-interest simply because it's in their self-interest to do so: This will automatically create coherence. Claiming citizenship is the problem is to put the cart-before-the-horse when the problem is that at present no-one has any real vested-interest in being loyal to a culture that doesn't put their self-interest at its heart. And no rational entity ever works for the self-interest of others as well as they do for their own.
This is simple human nature – and a society not based on human nature needs to enforce citizenship by law and propaganda - as the former communist regimes had to. (It should be noted that all these failed as societies. And for good reason.)
Karen Chouhan, 1990 Trust trustee: 'The government needs to stop viewing Black communities as the problem, which is simply not true when you consider the contribution we make to society and the efforts we put in to get on'. This comment is entirely irrelevant and falls into a White Racist Trap. White Racists don't view Blacks in terms of Their achievements but in terms of Their skin colour. This, White Racists believe, allows Them to exploit that coloration as a signifier of genetic inferiority. No matter what Blacks achieve, Whites will always treat them as inferiors. Whites are always going to consider 'Black communities' as a problem simply because They are Black, not because of attempts to integrate or contributing to wider society.
Such naive and ignorant comments concerning the nature of White Racism betray the stupid and idiotic view that appealing to Their reason can appease Whites. And yet racism is a largely unreasonable viewpoint; proving that Blacks such as these are merely sucking-up-to, and effectively apologising for, White Racism. Such Blacks can't stand on Their own two feet and need Whites to help Them; proving that They are, indeed, as inferior as White Racists claim Them to be.
‘...[T]he minister should be looking at far-right extremism, and how their agenda of attacking multiculturalism and immigration has made it to mainstream thinking, and what effect this is having on community relations'. '...[A]ttacking multiculturalism and immigration' has always been 'mainstream thinking' in the White communities. How else can you explain, for example, the British Empire, the North Atlantic Slave Trade, racist immigration controls and the existence of the BNP (British national party)?
What is called here 'far-right extremism' is simply the tip of a racist iceberg; proving again that Blacks think They can blame White Extremists for the racism They experience. There's no meaningful difference between this and Whites thinking They can blame Muslim Extremists for Their endemic White Fear of Muslims. Both groups are equally racist in Their mutual desire to scapegoat someone who isn't Themselves, so what's the difference? The truth is that – in essentials - there isn't one. Both groups want to control men's minds for political gain and for political expediency – to line Their own pockets in so doing.
‘Nobody has tried harder than Black communities to integrate'. The truth here is that 'Black communities' have – instead - tried very hard to buy-off the protection racket that is White Racism by trying very hard to renounce Their own culture and act White. This is not integration, it's arse-kissing servitude.
'The issue is the fact that society as a whole continues to discriminate against them'. Yes, of course: It always will. There is no reason for it to adopt any other approach since Blacks offer no alternative and Whites can't conceive of culture without self-interest being its basis. All that can be done is to show Whites that it's not in Their self-interest to continue being racist – but no Black ever does this. Blacks Themselves can't imagine a culture not based on racism because Blacks are just as racist as Whites, and are simply blaming Whites for Their own racist tendencies.
'Let’s look at why surveys find 9 out of 10 white people do not have a Black friend, or why 4 out of 10 white people do not want a Black neighbour. This is the problem with citizenship and integration today'. These are not the problems, themselves – merely proofs that White Culture is endemically racist. When one starts considering the evidence one has of a given phenomena as the problem, then one can easily start to think that the solution is simply to hide or destroy the evidence. Whites already do this and Blacks are trying to do just the same by evading the actual problem.
Friendship is chosen. One doesn't want friends foisted upon one because that merely leads to resentment – not friendship. Only the lonely think otherwise. In any case, there aren't enough Blacks (only 8% of the UK population, after all) to go around for every white to have at least one black friend.
Again, if Whites don't want Black neighbours then that's Their preference – to which They are fully entitled so long as it's merely an expressed preference and is not legally-enforced. A man of self-respect wouldn't want to live where he's not wanted. This is why we have countries and communities, in the first place. So those of a like mind can then congregate together and enjoy each other's company and not be offended by the presence of those one considers undesirable – for whatever reason. Such preferences can only affect Blacks if Blacks actually want Whites to like Them. And if They want that, then They truly possess the desperation of the constitutionally lonely. '...[T]he problem with citizenship and integration today' is that political airheads think these things can be forced upon the citizens. This is communist totalitarianism, not liberty and justice. Do Blacks really believe that They can force Whites to legislate for love? If They do, then perhaps Whites are right to section proportionately-more Blacks than Whites under the present Mental Health Act since love is, by its nature, a voluntary act?
'The 1990 Trust believes that Ruth Kelly (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government DCLG) should be turning her attention to tackling the root causes of race inequality instead of problematizing Black communities'. Yes, but 'problematizing Black communities' is easier to achieve for the same reason that it's easier to hate a man than to love him. And why would Whites not take the path-of-least-resistance and do what's easiest? Blacks certainly wouldn't!
The 'root causes of race inequality' are that it's easier to hate than to love and that it's easier to blame others than accept personal responsibility. Blacks do this every bit as much as Whites do, the hypocrites!
'What is needed is not another talking shop producing a report which sits on the shelf, but real action to tackle the problems identified by previous research'. Fine, so why don't Blacks take this action Themselves rather than waiting for Whites to do so? Answer: Because Blacks are dependent on Whites to accept Them as equals and would fear a White Racist Backlash should Blacks one day have the guts to go it alone and be successful on Their own Black terms. (Emotionally-inadequate Blacks live in paranoid fear that if, in a racist culture, Blacks drives expensive cars, They'll always be the targets of invidious racist-abuse. To avoid finding-out if this is true or not, Blacks find it easier to be resolute social failures and then have the cheek to blame this on White Racism when the root cause is Their own fear of Whites. This merely produces the very racism They fear occurring.) So long as Blacks continue to choose-to-fail, They tacitly convince Whites that Blacks really are racially inferior and that inactive talking-shops (White Propaganda) are all that Blacks need be offered to keep Them quiet.
If Blacks chose-to-succeed, They'd find that Whites are more frightened of Them, than They could ever be of Whites. Whites know this, which is why They spend a great deal of time and money trying very hard to make Blacks fear Them. Whites do this mostly through foreign military adventures designed to make Blacks cack Their underpants in the presence of the allegedly God-like might of White Technology. That this doesn't work, annoys Whites no end because They have no other gambit.
'We know what the problems are: a failure to make real progress in creating true race equality in Britain, such as equal outcomes in employment, education, housing, health etc'. This is communist horse-manure because human beings are not created equal.
'The problems are not: they are not (Sic) due to a failure of Black communities to integrate. Instead (Sic) much of the blame must be laid at the failure of indigenous communities to willingly embrace multicultural Britain'. This is the same scapegoating this press release hypocritically accuses Whites of doing!
'With so many committees, commissions and toolkits - the delivery of race equality will drown in a managerialist framework that cramps resources and efforts into the managing of processes not outcomes'. More communist horseshit! Outcomes cannot be managed in the facile way envisaged here. If they could there'd be a helluva lot more happy parents with loving children following successful careers as a result of well-managed childhoods. In reality, we have (for example) fantastic abortion, teenage pregnancy, illiteracy and alcoholism rates; proving that most people's upbringings – no matter how well-managed – produced outcomes that rational men would not logically desire.
Stop whining; start living.
Monday 21 August 2006
Health department violating human rights law
RESOPONSE TO ABOVE ARTICLE:
‘The 1983 Act has caused so much damage to our community over the past 23 years and will only get worse without a proper review of this legislation, which takes into account the discrimination suffered by Black service users’.
‘Excluding race from the rewrite of a piece of legislation that has destroyed countless Black people’s lives makes it clear how committed the Government are to addressing this issue.’
The above quotes are the result of a Black Inferiority Complex. The fact is that if you allow people to label you as inferior, it's because you are. None of this is the real issue here.
The central issue here is that Blacks want Whites to love Them. When Whites don't, Blacks turn-in on Themselves and start whining about the fact that They're obviously so worthless as a race that Whites won't lower Themselves to offer Blacks unearned respect.
If Blacks don't want to be abused by Whites, then the answer is simple: Have nothing to do with Them and never turn your back on Them. Moreover, make sure you and your kids study the four basics. History - to teach Whites how racist They are. Law - to punish Whites for abusing Blacks who're foolish enough to allow Themselves to be abused & to teach those Blacks not to be so foolish in future. Psychiatry - to understand how Whites really think. Business - to become self-employed &, therefore, not dependent upon Racist White Employers for those jobs that Whites won't do.
The 'DoH has been entirely fraudulent in its handling of these reforms, we have had eight years of debate over mental health legislation and millions have been spent on committees and consultation with very little of what the professionals... working in this area have said being taken on board'. The reason for this is that ultimately Whites want to claim that all Blacks are mentally-ill because this is what They actually believe. Whites still can't get over Their innate belief that Blacks are intellectually-inferior to Whites. Therefore, the views of Blacks aren't wanted – it's just that Whites want to give Blacks the impression that they are. Whites hope that Blacks will be tired-out by years of consultation and then, while Blacks' eyes are droop-lidded from exhaustion, Whites will legalise White Racism – Their ultimate goal.
'Mental Health law should be seen as disability rights legislation rather than was (sic) we are currently seeing which is more akin to criminal justice legislation.’ This furthers my point that Whites wish to criminalise being Black, since it allows Whites to lock-up Blacks for behaving differently, which Blacks do anyway since Their culture is different. Whites want to prohibit difference in the way that They've done within Their own culture given the fact that Whites behave like clones of each other.
‘The crisis in BME mental health is a public disgrace and it beggars belief why it is not being looked at properly.’ What really 'beggars belief' is that any sane, experienced person should be surprised that mental heath for Blacks is racist. Don't these people know that White Culture is racist and that the basic fact of UK culture is that Blacks are tolerated here not accepted?
‘Tinkering with legislation is not going to address the fundamental problems of institutional racism within mental health services. What we need to see is a royal commission on mental health which looks... [at] every aspect of this issue if we are to see any lasting fundamental change.’ This would be just more talking with White Racists who do not intend to renounce the racism that is Their only reason for existing. This is why there can be no 'lasting fundamental change'. The simple, practical solution here is for Blacks to only use Black psychiatrists and for Blacks to have separate mental clinics from Whites.
Whites are terrified of the mentally-ill because They fear that that is what They could so easily become if They let go of Their many emotional repressions (these are the only things that make White Culture possible to begin with). And Whites don't wish to be reminded of the possibility that they, someday, will lose control not of whom They actually are, but of whom Their racial fantasises tell Them They are. Combine this with Whites' endemic fear of Blacks and it's all-too-easy to see why Whites want as many Blacks locked-up as They can possibly manage – with the racist law's arms around Them. Combined with high custodial rates for Black Criminals and it's easy to see that the UK is becoming a penal colony for people who smell differently.
‘All too often Black people have under estimated the power they can wield when they stick together'. This is the usual fallacy that people are stronger together. In fact, they're weaker because they then never learn to stand on their own two feet. They also have to learn to work with people they don't necessarily agree with for the sake of togetherness. Such togetherness is a fake and ultimately leads to the collapse of the ensemble because of internal dissension.
‘The 1983 Act has caused so much damage to our community over the past 23 years and will only get worse without a proper review of this legislation, which takes into account the discrimination suffered by Black service users’.
‘Excluding race from the rewrite of a piece of legislation that has destroyed countless Black people’s lives makes it clear how committed the Government are to addressing this issue.’
The above quotes are the result of a Black Inferiority Complex. The fact is that if you allow people to label you as inferior, it's because you are. None of this is the real issue here.
The central issue here is that Blacks want Whites to love Them. When Whites don't, Blacks turn-in on Themselves and start whining about the fact that They're obviously so worthless as a race that Whites won't lower Themselves to offer Blacks unearned respect.
If Blacks don't want to be abused by Whites, then the answer is simple: Have nothing to do with Them and never turn your back on Them. Moreover, make sure you and your kids study the four basics. History - to teach Whites how racist They are. Law - to punish Whites for abusing Blacks who're foolish enough to allow Themselves to be abused & to teach those Blacks not to be so foolish in future. Psychiatry - to understand how Whites really think. Business - to become self-employed &, therefore, not dependent upon Racist White Employers for those jobs that Whites won't do.
The 'DoH has been entirely fraudulent in its handling of these reforms, we have had eight years of debate over mental health legislation and millions have been spent on committees and consultation with very little of what the professionals... working in this area have said being taken on board'. The reason for this is that ultimately Whites want to claim that all Blacks are mentally-ill because this is what They actually believe. Whites still can't get over Their innate belief that Blacks are intellectually-inferior to Whites. Therefore, the views of Blacks aren't wanted – it's just that Whites want to give Blacks the impression that they are. Whites hope that Blacks will be tired-out by years of consultation and then, while Blacks' eyes are droop-lidded from exhaustion, Whites will legalise White Racism – Their ultimate goal.
'Mental Health law should be seen as disability rights legislation rather than was (sic) we are currently seeing which is more akin to criminal justice legislation.’ This furthers my point that Whites wish to criminalise being Black, since it allows Whites to lock-up Blacks for behaving differently, which Blacks do anyway since Their culture is different. Whites want to prohibit difference in the way that They've done within Their own culture given the fact that Whites behave like clones of each other.
‘The crisis in BME mental health is a public disgrace and it beggars belief why it is not being looked at properly.’ What really 'beggars belief' is that any sane, experienced person should be surprised that mental heath for Blacks is racist. Don't these people know that White Culture is racist and that the basic fact of UK culture is that Blacks are tolerated here not accepted?
‘Tinkering with legislation is not going to address the fundamental problems of institutional racism within mental health services. What we need to see is a royal commission on mental health which looks... [at] every aspect of this issue if we are to see any lasting fundamental change.’ This would be just more talking with White Racists who do not intend to renounce the racism that is Their only reason for existing. This is why there can be no 'lasting fundamental change'. The simple, practical solution here is for Blacks to only use Black psychiatrists and for Blacks to have separate mental clinics from Whites.
Whites are terrified of the mentally-ill because They fear that that is what They could so easily become if They let go of Their many emotional repressions (these are the only things that make White Culture possible to begin with). And Whites don't wish to be reminded of the possibility that they, someday, will lose control not of whom They actually are, but of whom Their racial fantasises tell Them They are. Combine this with Whites' endemic fear of Blacks and it's all-too-easy to see why Whites want as many Blacks locked-up as They can possibly manage – with the racist law's arms around Them. Combined with high custodial rates for Black Criminals and it's easy to see that the UK is becoming a penal colony for people who smell differently.
‘All too often Black people have under estimated the power they can wield when they stick together'. This is the usual fallacy that people are stronger together. In fact, they're weaker because they then never learn to stand on their own two feet. They also have to learn to work with people they don't necessarily agree with for the sake of togetherness. Such togetherness is a fake and ultimately leads to the collapse of the ensemble because of internal dissension.
Friday 11 August 2006
Fat cat Trevor won't fight for us
RESPONSE TO ABOVE ARTICLE:
More proof that Trevor Phillips is a White Man's Nigger.
Mr Phillips has learned from UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's relationship with US President George W Bush that being another man's poodle certainly has its advantages. The fat cat here has taken his 30 pieces of silver and made off with it.
However, the real question with this article is who is the "Us" of its title?
Obviously, those racist critics of racism who judge themselves by their skin colour and allow (in the interests of equality) others to do likewise - thus exacerbating racial tensions between communities? (Tensions exacerbated because those behaving in this way have no other means of self-identification, so that the tension is really within themselves rather than between themselves and others.)
Alternatively, is it those who think they speak for Blacks just because They, Themselves, are so coloured? Aren't They falling into the same trap of assuming that only a Black can head the Commission for Racial Equality and its institutional successors? Isn’t it racist to assume Whites can’t understand and effectively fight racists? On the other hand, do those who make such insinuations really and truly believe that all whites are so racist that only legislation can be used to effectively punish them for their sins?
I think we should be told.
How disgustingly hypocritical to attack Whites for thinking in racist terms of a homogeneous “Them”, when Blacks are perfectly prepared to think in terms of a homogenous “Us”. The Commission for Racial Equality wasn’t established as a Black Man’s personal fiefdom against White Racism; it was established to combat all racists. Blacks forget this and make Their racism all the more obvious, thereby. It would have been more consistent with this principle if this article had been entitled: “Fat cat Trevor won't fight for racial equity”. However, one can’t expect Blacks to be any more consistent with the facts of reality than Whites are – can one?
More proof that Trevor Phillips is a White Man's Nigger.
Mr Phillips has learned from UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's relationship with US President George W Bush that being another man's poodle certainly has its advantages. The fat cat here has taken his 30 pieces of silver and made off with it.
However, the real question with this article is who is the "Us" of its title?
Obviously, those racist critics of racism who judge themselves by their skin colour and allow (in the interests of equality) others to do likewise - thus exacerbating racial tensions between communities? (Tensions exacerbated because those behaving in this way have no other means of self-identification, so that the tension is really within themselves rather than between themselves and others.)
Alternatively, is it those who think they speak for Blacks just because They, Themselves, are so coloured? Aren't They falling into the same trap of assuming that only a Black can head the Commission for Racial Equality and its institutional successors? Isn’t it racist to assume Whites can’t understand and effectively fight racists? On the other hand, do those who make such insinuations really and truly believe that all whites are so racist that only legislation can be used to effectively punish them for their sins?
I think we should be told.
How disgustingly hypocritical to attack Whites for thinking in racist terms of a homogeneous “Them”, when Blacks are perfectly prepared to think in terms of a homogenous “Us”. The Commission for Racial Equality wasn’t established as a Black Man’s personal fiefdom against White Racism; it was established to combat all racists. Blacks forget this and make Their racism all the more obvious, thereby. It would have been more consistent with this principle if this article had been entitled: “Fat cat Trevor won't fight for racial equity”. However, one can’t expect Blacks to be any more consistent with the facts of reality than Whites are – can one?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)