- Site Info
- Being Human
- Business Success
- Cultural Identity
- DVD Region Codes
- Daily Routine
- Human Activity
- Memorable Passwords
- Mental Health
- Uncommon Common
- Optical-Media Care
- Email Subject Lines to Attract Readers
- Trusting Christians
- White‑Devil’s Dictionary
- Hints & Tips
- White Guilt
- Caucasian Confusions
- Social Media
- Affirmative Action
- Cultural Appropriation
Friday, 15 December 2006
'Lee Jasper [My Favorite Martian (Sic)], race and policing advisor to London Mayor Ken Livingstone, said: "The Prime Minister talks about adopting British values, but when you look at the statistics on discrimination you can see these values are not applied equally". What this alien doesn't understand is that the reason these values aren't applied equally because 'British values' are quintessentially inegalitarian. If immigrants adopted 'British values', they'd have to become as racist as the host population. This, inevitably, would lead to a perpetuation of the racist malaise forever haunting Whites. This moron. Jasper, doesn't understand this because he wants to be liked by Whites; because he doesn't like himself. Discrimination doesn't matter – only whether or not others are hindering you. You can't force Whites to like you – no matter how much you need Their love.
Professor Tariq Ramadan, president of the European Muslim Network, commented: "...[Blair] seemed to say 'if you are [an indigenous] citizen you don't have to integrate'. This is precisely what Tony Blair IS saying: There's one rule for Whites; another for Blacks. How long did it take this Muslim idiot to figure that one out? Whites will only accept Blacks so long as Blacks not only behave like Whites but also start thinking like Them. And even then Blacks will only ever be granted Honorary Citizenship (ie, Honorary White) status. Blacks will always be racial suspects to Whites if this simple condition isn't met; the implication being that White Culture is so inherently and self evidently superior that Blacks must be crazy (ie, inferior) not to want to be just like "Us".
'Prof Ramadan added: "I'm not scared about the rise of the far-right. I'm scared about the normalisation of their discourse in mainstream society".' This prick hasn't lived here long enough: He's putting the cart before the horse. Racist discourse hasn't become normalised; it was there all the time – you merely choose not to identify the source of your personal and politically correct pain. The far right are a product of this discourse and its manipulator; they are not the creator of it: We all are! If racism were not a fundamental part of White Culture, there would be no far right and no increase in racial attacks on Blacks. And this intellectually lazy slob calls himself a professor!
Karen Chouhan, a trustee of the human rights group The 1990 Trust, commented: "A lot of what Tony Blair said was flawed and contradictory.
"He failed to recognise the contribution of Muslims to society and didn't mention the role of foreign policy".
Whites aren't interested in the 'contribution of Muslims to [White] society' since Whites no more believe in Society than anyone else. Whites only see that Muslims do not contribute to THEIR society; that is, Their belief in Their inherent racial superiority. If Muslims openly came out and supported the White Belief in Their genetic superiority, They'd find that Whites would welcome Them warmly. For Whites, foreign policy is simply an extension of the racism practised domestically: If Whites see nothing wrong with home-grown racism, why would They alter Their racist attitudes abroad?
Tony Blair is right to rule out a link between 'ethnicity and disadvantage'. This link can only exist in the minds of those so called disadvantaged who want the world to owe them a living because of their simple refusal to grow up. This applies equally to racists and anti racists and is the only true equality that will ever exist between the races: An equality of fecklessness. '[C]ountless government studies across many areas of public policy' merely show that those who claim to be disadvantaged are loud and clear only in their claim for special privileges at the expense of those they claim have disadvantaged them. Such studies only prove that Whites discriminate against Blacks (to vainly prove Their racial superiority) not that Blacks cannot overcome White Racism to be successful on Their own terms as, say, the Jews have. As always with the cap in hand brigade, they refuse to face the fact that, by not working hard, they've done this to themselves and so spend their lives with their begging bowls out in hope of obtaining manna from earth. That is, a paradise that they don't have to die first to obtain – a paradise on earth. This is the essential tragedy of the poor all over the world, not a poverty of money, but a poverty of spirit.
'The Prime Minister ended with the message: "Our tolerance is part of what makes Britain, Britain. So conform to it; or don't come here". Needless to say, this is a typical expression of White Intolerance. To be fully tolerant one must also tolerate the intolerant – unless they're hindering your life. Whites willingly tolerate White Racists and call this freedom of speech, but Black Racists are (for obvious racial reasons) never to be tolerated. Clearly, we have here a racist Prime Minister but then, when have we never had such a thing?
Simon Woolley of Operation Black Vote, 'referring to Blair's comment that funding should be redirected away from voluntary organisations that fail to promote the government's integration agenda, Woolley writes: "The measures would only serve to dramatically undermine the genuine efforts by many of his ministerial departments and others to tackle race and religious inequalities". The 'government's integration agenda' is an inherently racist one since it wants to be a one way process wherein Blacks must become like Whites - never the other way around or a compromise between the two. Whites have decided this for Their own racial benefit not that of Blacks. Therefore, 'genuine efforts' by Whites to tackle racism only exist in Simian Woolley's mind, not out there in the real world.
'The 1990 Trust also believe that these comments would have caused an outcry if they had been directed at womens' groups or disability organisations'. Correct, but Whites always believe that moral principles and ethical axioms are only to be applied piecemeal so as to avoid being fair and just. Avoiding equity means more of the world's scarce resources for Whites and less for Blacks. This is why, for example, it's not a crime to discriminate against someone on grounds of class, because the Whites' class system is very important to Them and making it a crime would mean having to dismantle it or, more likely, more effectively conceal it. This is something Whites are never going to do because, like racism, it's how They define and identity Themselves; without such social navigational aids, Whites'd be completely lost because Whites possess no other source of identity. This allows Whites (They think) to make comments that in one context would cause an outcry, while in others They meet Widespread White Agreement. Whites never let the right hand know what the left hand is doing so as to avoid Their rampant hypocrisy and the guilt that is a necessary part and an inevitable cause of such hypocrisy.
'While Blair said the need to promote integration was a requirement for black groups to get government funding, Blair did not apply the same standard to white organisations'. Of course not, because 'white organisations' are not seen (by Whites) as requiring to integrate. Whites define integration as not meaning conforming to the facts of reality in a rationally ordered universe, but doing the White Man's Bidding. The latter is White Wishful Thinking; the former, the ethical ideal that the vast majority of the world's population evade – even, and most especially, those Blacks who claim to be condemning it but whom are, in reality, doing nothing more than building a lucrative career for Themselves and Their kind, by the continued existence of such racism.
Article copyright © 2007, by Frank TALKER. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute it electronically and in print, other than as part of a book and provided that mention of the author’s Website/log http://franktalker.blogspot.com/ is included: E mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on Body Odour (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1996) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.
Wednesday, 6 December 2006
‘The immigration minister, Liam Byrne, said the extra requirement was being imposed on those applying for indefinite leave to remain because a good grasp of English was essential to play a full role in society and properly integrate into British communities.’ This is the Usual White Blather to evade the fact that white immigration controls are always inherently racist since they seek to keep blacks in the minority which, in a democracy, means permanently underprivileged. The only real means by which any black can ‘play a full role in society and properly integrate’ into Britain is if Whites would renounce racism. But notice, in this entire article, the fundamental underpinning of White Culture – racism – is only ever mentioned in order to dismiss it as effectively irrelevant. This is because Blacks are being implicitly blamed for Their unwillingness to put Their heads into the White Man’s Noose by having anything to do (ie, integrating) with those who only know how to judge others by skin colour.
The idea of a ‘Britishness test’ is fundamentally predicated on an attempt to evade the real issue - Britain for the Whites – behind the cowardly evasion: Britain for the British. This is obvious since Whites implicitly define Britishness as being synonymous with Whiteness. The test is not of one’s Britishness but of one’s Whiteness; which is to say one’s ability to act (although obviously not appear) White – as Whites define this. This means having to be acceptable to Whites; presupposing a one sided concept of integration. This is as doomed to failure as would be a one sided marriage wherein the husband has to approve of the wife but the wife doesn’t have to approve of the husband. Such marriages either end in divorce or, more likely, never take place in the first place. (This is especially hypocritical given the White Man’s alleged disdain for forced marriages – what integration actually is.)
‘...[P]ublic anxiety over immigration is closely linked to economic deprivation rather than racism.’ This is clever but not clever enough. It rather poorly tries to evade the issue that racism is primarily motivated by ‘economic deprivation.’ In other words, ‘economic deprivation’ and racism are, in a very real sense, the same thing because the former is an excuse for the latter. The attempt to separate the two issues here (as if they were in no way connected) then begs the question that is racism isn't the result of 'economic deprivation', then from whence does it spring? Whites, as always, are trying to claim two things here. First, that racism isn't the issue when it clearly is. And, second, that Blacks are just as racist as Whites, so that justifies White Racism.
'...[W]here competition over scarce and finite resources is the greatest, relations with newcomers are likely to be negatively affected'. This is true in all circumstances, in all times and in all places. It's quite meaningless since it doesn't highlight anything specific about the problems discussed. For example, it's very common for the lower classes to receive a poorer educational experience than the middle classes, no matter how intelligent they are. The middle classes don't want the extra economic competition that an educated poor would imply because those poor would then compete for traditionally middle class jobs; making it harder for the middle classes to retain them. In what sphere of human life does such competition NOT take place? Which resources that we value are NOT 'scarce and finite'. Whites again are claiming that it's OK to be racist in order to protect resources that Whites believe They should have a permanent monopoly over.
‘...[S]ix key factors limit the integration of new migrants: lack of language skills and recognised qualifications; moving too often from place to place; lack of knowledge about the system, such as how to find a home or a school; hostile public attitudes; public services unable to meet migrants’ needs; and legal barriers because of their immigration status'. Again, no mention of White Racism as a problem at all! Presumably Whites aren't racist anymore, in which case why aren't Whites proclaiming this self evident renunciation of Their former ways from the rooftops? Answer: Because They haven't and this is merest eyewash.
'...[T]he challenges faced by refugees and other new migrants are as much to do with poverty, exclusion and racism as with the fact that they have just arrived in the country'. No rational person denies this. However, having just arrived in the country is a temporary problem as the new arrivals get used to their new home. Poverty can be dealt with by working hard. But the intractable problems of exclusion and racism can't be solved by these new arrivals, it is the indigenous people who must act to deal with them and they show no willingness whatsoever to do so. In this way these latter – more permanent – problems become generational; making integration not only extremely unlikely but also quite impossible. The Pathetic White Conflation of temporary issues and permanent ones just shows what a way They have to go before They admit to the true nature of Their own racism and begin taking active steps to deal with it sensibly. And not just blame the new arrivals for the pre existence of White Men's Prejudices.
Copyright © 2007, by Frank TALKER. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute it electronically and in print, other than as part of a book and provided that mention of the author’s Website/log http://franktalker.blogspot.com/ is included: E mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.