|October 12th, 2014||#21|
how the world works 101: jew publisher publishes book without intellectual value written by jew. anti-white leftist politics masquerading as academics. book is sold in jew-run campus store, priced 10x normal price (and rebought for 10% of what it's purchased, so it can be recycled for another 50% profit). book is assigned by a jew prof, purchased by a white sucker going into debt for what he is told and believes is a college education. he learns to hate himself his people their history and is told and believes this is education. what a racket.
|October 12th, 2014||#22|
Paula S. Rothenberg (Senior Fellow, The Murphy Institute, CUNY)
Paper Text , 160 pages
Described as vital, eye-opening, and powerful, White Privilege, Fourth Edition remains essential reading for students and educators alike. Used in courses across disciplines and educational levels, this unique anthology expertly presents the complexity of whiteness today and illuminates the nature of privilege and power in our society. The Fourth Edition continues to bring together the core writings on privilege and features 3 new selections from Nell Irvin Painter, Robert Jensen and Justin Podur.
|December 1st, 2014||#23|
'White Privilege' cult alert: Sally Kohn says we're all born with it
Like many other cult members, advocates of 'white privilege' are vociferous in their advocacy and consider those of us who fail to see the 'light' as pathetic ignoramuses.
It's no surprise, then, that white privilege apologist Sally Kohn continues to preach her nonsense. After all, you'll never meet a cult member who knows she is a cult member.
(See Kenn's Law #14.)
Wrong - and weakly or deliberately so. Kohn is a typical jew:
Sally Rebecca Kohn was born on March 27, 1977 in Allentown, Pennsylvania to Donald Kohn, an engineer, and Melinda Kohn, a computer programmer. Kohn's mother introduced her to volunteering and community organizing at age 12, when they began volunteering together at a local domestic violence shelter. Kohn was raised Jewish.
White privilege is a psychological lever utilized by cultural Marxism to infect our minds with the guilt virus; a malady that is best cured by rational thinking. The word was concocted as a palatable synonym for bourgeois.
Half-right. It's intended to lubricate whites for dispossession by making them feel guilty, which paralyzes their ability to perceive and resist what's actually going on. It's not a synonym for bourgeois, though, because it's applied against all whites, not just those of a particular class. Rational thinking as a counter-measure would include identifying the true source and nature of the attack, not just pointing out why it's technically wrong in rational terms. 'White privilege' is an attack on whites by jews. That's the important part. And that's the part that conservative yokesites like DailyKenn won't tell you.
It's also a racist pejorative.
Kohn makes her case for white privilege, stating that we're all born with it. The CNN commentator's views were published in the Washington Post and alluded to by DailyKenn.com last week.
Indeed there has been at least one study that confirms that white people are born bigots. That study, no doubt, was precluded (Kenn's Law #8) and funded with a government grant, compliments of 'white privileged' tax payers.
Actual studies have found that whites, white babies in specific, are less xenophobic than non-white babies. Whites in fact are the most individuated and least racist race on earth, which is why they find it hard to perceive themselves under racial attack and defend themselves.
• The concept of white privilege emerged as a concession when the predatory left was forced to acknowledge the disparity gap between people groups was more than sociological; it is inherent.
They've known this all along. White privilege is the demand that blacks be treated like whites while behaving like blacks. People treat everyone like their group or subset's average, if they don't know them individually. This is rational. All do it. It's problematized into anti-whitism by loxist jews. Whites never earn anything, they merely enjoy privilege. It's beyond ridiculous, but jews have the media power to make it stick.
White people tend to be innovative. That fact is made evident by virtually every convenience that enhances the lives of humanity. Cultural Marxism attempts to demonize white innovation by slapping it with the 'white privilege' label and, thereby, imposing guilt.
We are all freeriders on a tiny handful of Aryan geniuses; this is true. The concept of white privilege is a monstrous imposture, given that most blacks owe both the quality of their lives and their very physical existence to white culture and science, technology and medicine. Being ignorant of this, and feeding off it while working unwittingly to destroy it - these are the ultimate privilege. Privilege, I hardly need tell you, is black.
• Because white innovation is genetic, it cannot be redistributed through sociological methods. That is, if wealth were redistributed equally today, tomorrow white people would still have a penchant for innovation. The only means to redistribute DNA is through cross breeding.
Which is promoted unceasingly by the jews Kenn won't name.
Meanwhile we suspect that Kohn lives in a white, Jim Crowish community where she is not obligated to redistribute her privilege.
More like an enclave of jewish privilege. What is gained by not calling Kohn a jew? Nothing. What is lost? Everything. The source of the attack must be identified if it is to be stopped. DailyKenn ilk are like mopping the floor with head down, refusing to look at the hand turning the tap.
Instead, she redistributes her nonsense.
• So why to highly intelligent white people allow their minds to be infected with the 'white privilege' doctrine?
Answer: The same reason white people allow themselves to be deluded by any other religious gult.
It's all they hear. It comes from authority. There are penalties for not going along with it. No one they respect speaks out against it. Most people are conformist clods, not brave, freethinking individuals.
• The inherent problem with cultist lies is that we 'act out' our beliefs.
(See Kenn's Law #15.)
That is, our actions and words are predicated by our beliefs.
When people believe the wrong things, they say and do wrong things.
When people believe dumb things, they say and do dumb things.
Kohn's op-ed is evidence of that fact.
No, Kohn is a jew. Your assumption she's white and wrong is incorrect, and might as well be deliberately so. Kohn intends to destroy white society. That's what jews do. Not calling her a jew accedes in the destruction by covering up for the destroyer.
It was also made evident last week when a college student who was mugged by a black thug excused the attack, citing his white privilege.
Guy named Friedfeld (sp?) is likely a jew himself, like Kohn.
Cult brainwashing makes us behave in the most peculiar manners.
Attempting to reason with a convert to the 'white privilege' cult is maddening. It's no different than reasoning with any other cult member.
Last edited by Alex Linder; December 6th, 2014 at 12:18 AM.
|December 2nd, 2014||#24|
NYU Launches Group to Help ‘White Administrators’ Realize They’re Biased
The “White Administrators Talk Race” group began this semester.
By Katherine Timpf
New York University has launched a discussion group called “White Administrators Talk Race” in the hopes that white administrators will realize how biased they are and stop oppressing people with their privilege.
During meetings, attendees discuss “the reality of white privilege;” “biases, prejudice, and stereotypes;” and ways to “stand in solidarity against systems of oppression,” according to the official description on the college website. So the system itself is running workshops on fighting its own oppression?
The Center for Multicultural Education began hosting the group this semester. Some people, like Goddard Residential College director Justin Lerner, think it’s great:
“In light of the recent Ferguson decision, I think it’s even more imperative for white administrators to understand their own power and privilege and how they can use that privilege to be good allies to people of color and to effect positive change,” he said, according to an article in Washington Square News, the official student newspaper.
But others pointed out that a group centered around white people talking to other white people might not be the best way for them to understand the struggles of non-white people.
“By operating under a title that only mentions white administrators, individuals of color may feel discouraged from participating,” the Square News editorial board writes.
But despite the fact that they literally named the group “White Administrators Talk Race,” Center for Multicultural Education director Selima Jumarali insisted that the center was “very careful . . . about not marketing it as a group that is just for white administrators.”
CME also hosts a student version of the discussion group, called “Unpacking White Privilege,” every other Wednesday.
Last edited by Alex Linder; December 2nd, 2014 at 01:05 PM.
|December 2nd, 2014||#25|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Most significantly, ding-a-ling Justin Lerner overlooks (in all probability intentionally) the fact that a grand jury declining a true bill on grounds of insufficient "probable cause" effectively guarantees that a trial jury would (embarrassingly for the prosecution) acquit on the much more stringent standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". This failure to distinguish and focus on relevant issues is understandable among the illiterate (majority) boobisie, but when it's proffered by "elites" (such as this miscreant) the excuse of ignorance becomes much harder to sustain. The technique, however, is repetitive, continuous, and unceasing. Non-sequitur raised to the level of Godhead.
No way out but through the jews.
|December 8th, 2014||#26|
notre dame falls in line with WP seminar, and pays for students to attend white priv conference
|December 8th, 2014||#27|
Notre Dame's 'White Privilege Seminar': Racist indoctrination or education?
Critics say the six-week class at Notre Dame serves to indoctrinate students and shames white people. The class professor says it's not about 'white bashing' but about understanding the basis of privilege.
Christian Science Monitor By Husna Haq
For a select group of students at the University of Notre Dame, a typical course load may include Human Biology 101, Introduction to Statistics, 19th century Russian Literature – and the White Privilege Seminar.
The last course, a new offering by the university in South Bend, Ind., is getting plenty of attention from critics who say it indoctrinates students and shames white people.
Sociology 25280, or "White Privilege Seminar: An Introduction to the Intersections of Privilege," is a one-credit, six-week preparatory sociology class designed to educate and train ten carefully selected students on the definitions of and causes and effects of white privilege, according to the course description.
Recommended: What is your social class? Take our quiz to find out!
“The nature of living in contemporary culture indicates that people consciously and unconsciously simultaneously participate in and are affected by systems of oppression; however, since these behaviors can be learned, they can also be unlearned," it reads. As such, the main objective for the course, it continues, is “personal transformation: to leave the class and conference more aware of injustices and better equipped with tools to disrupt personal, institutional, and worldwide systems of oppression.”
The class culminates with a trip to the White Privilege Conference, paid for by the university.
The class is getting special attention in the wake of the grand jury decisions in the cases of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, two unarmed black men fatally killed by white police officers, both of which resulted in non-indictments. News of the grand jury decisions has led to increased racial polarization and renewed attention to the issues of racial injustice and police brutality.
But for some on the political right, the class is an example of liberal education gone too far.
"More Progressive Indoctrination: Notre Dame to Teach White Students That They are Inherently Racist," trumpeted a Tea Party News Network headline.
"Major University Decides Students Are Racist, Now Offers A Class Called “White….," reads the Young Conservatives website.
Critics also lit up Twitter in protest.
"This isn't education, it's indoctrination," Notre Dame student and conservative campus activist Mark Gianfalla told the Daily Caller. "The problem I see with this course is that it is teaching a flawed and inherently racist sociological theory as fact."
Turning his focus on the course professor, Iris Outlaw, Gianfalla continued, "This is a faculty member who helped organize protests against the College Republicans’ hosting of Ann Coulter on campus last year under the premise that Ann was a perpetrator of racial ‘hate speech.’ Nothing is stopping her, however, from spewing the idea of white privilege and consequently white guilt in a University sanctioned course.”
Referring to the White Privilege Conference students attend after the seminar, Gianfalla said, "[A]nyone would be able to tell that it is far from academic [...] This isn’t multicultural; it’s an opportunity to bias students towards the shaming of one culture and ethnicity.”
In an interview with Campus Reform, Professor Outlaw addressed the controversy.
“This is not going to be like a white bashing or anything like that,” she said. “It’s just to help people understand the basis of privilege as well because we all have different privileges depending on who we are.”
So while the seminar is named after white privilege, the class, in fact, will take a look at a variety of other privileges such as gender and disabilities, in addition to race, she said.
“We’re actually going to identify and talk about white privilege and other systems of oppression and how they’ve evolved,” she told Campus Reform. “We’re going to be looking at the historical context of privilege and oppression. We’re also going to be looking at social, political, and economic systems through the lens of white supremacy and how that’s played out.”
Is the White Privilege Seminar an example of liberal indoctrination or enlightenment? In an age of acute polarization, the answer may depend on who you are.
Last edited by Alex Linder; May 4th, 2015 at 09:09 AM.
|December 8th, 2014||#28|
What is the WPC?
What is the White Privilege Conference?
WPC is a conference that examines challenging concepts of privilege and oppression and offers solutions and team building strategies to work toward a more equitable world.
It is not a conference designed to attack, degrade or beat up on white folks. Then why are they specifically mentioned?
It is not a conference designed to rally white supremacist groups.
WPC is a conference designed to examine issues of privilege beyond skin color. Then why is white in the title? WPC is open to everyone and invites diverse perspectives to provide a comprehensive look at issues of privilege including: race, gender, sexuality, class, disability, etc. — the ways we all experience some form of privilege, and how we’re all affected by that privilege.
WPC attracts students, professionals, activists, parents, and community leaders/members from diverse perspectives. WPC welcomes folks with varying levels of experience addressing issues of diversity, cultural competency, and multiculturalism.
WPC is committed to a philosophy of “understanding, respecting and connecting.”
Who attends the WPC?
The conference is unique in its ability to bring together high school and college students, teachers, university faculty and higher education professionals, nonprofit staff, activists, social workers and counselors, healthcare workers, and members of the spiritual community and corporate arena. Annually, more than 1,500 attend from more than 35 states, Australia, Bermuda, Canada, and Germany.
Last edited by Alex Linder; May 4th, 2015 at 09:10 AM.
|December 8th, 2014||#29|
Notre Dame to participate in White Privilege Conference
on Dec 05, 2014 at 12:33 PM EDT
The University of Notre Dame will offer a seminar on white privilege next semester.
Students enrolled in the course will also be provided with transportation and lodging to the White Privilege Conference in Kentucky over spring break.
This is the first time the seminar is offered for credit at Notre Dame.
The University of Notre Dame will offer a white privilege seminar for the first time for credit next semester and bus students to an annual White Privilege Conference in Kentucky.
Ten students who make it through the application and interview process will be accepted into the six-week seminar sociology class, “White Privilege Seminar: An Introduction to the Intersections of Privilege.” The students will also attend the White Privilege Conference held in Louisville, Ky., in March as part of UND’s Gender Relations Center and Multicultural Student Programs and Services’ “student delegation.”
The application, obtained by Campus Reform, asked students to define white privilege, privilege in general, and identify their own privileges.
“The goal for each participant is personal transformation: to leave the class and conference more aware of injustices and be better equipped with tools to disrupt personal, institutional and worldwide systems of oppression,” the course description reads. “The nature of living in contemporary culture indicates that people consciously and unconsciously simultaneously participate in and are affected by systems of oppression; however, since these behaviors can be learned, they can also be unlearned.”
The application, obtained by Campus Reform, asked students to define white privilege, privilege in general, and identify their own privileges.
“Students accepted into the seminar will also be provided with free registration, travel, and lodging for the conference. Students will only need to pay for the meals that are not covered by the White Privilege Conference and “any other incidentals or purchases you would like to make during the trip,” the seminar description states.
According to the White Privilege Conference website, attendees will discuss “issues of privilege including: race, gender, sexuality, class, disability, etc.—the ways we all experience some form of privilege, and how we’re all affected by that privilege.”
“[A] fault that I find in this is that the University is financially supporting this agenda by providing funding for the [students] to attend the White Privilege Conference,” Mark Gianfalla, a student at UND told Campus Reform. “After researching this conference, anyone would be able to tell that it is far from academic [...] This isn’t multicultural; it’s an opportunity to bias students towards the shaming of one culture and ethnicity.”
“This isn’t education, it’s indoctrination,” Gianfalla, a senior finance major, said.
According to Iris Outlaw, director of UND’s Multicultural Student Services and Programs, while this is the first time the course is offered for credit, graduate students organized a similar seminar and conference trip last year that students could participate in during their free time.
“We’re actually going to identify and talk about white privilege and other systems of oppression and how they’ve evolved,” Outlaw told Campus Reform. “We’re going to be looking at the historical context of privilege and oppression. We’re also going to be looking at social, political, and economic systems through the lens of white supremacy and how that’s played out.”
Outlaw, who is one of three professors who will lead the class discussions in the seminar, said that one student who participated in the seminar last year is retaking it for credit and a chance to go to the conference again next semester.
Outlaw also said that while the seminar name includes white privilege—due to the name of the conference—the class will take a look at a variety of other privileges such as gender and disabilities.
“This is not going to be like a white bashing or anything like that,” Outlaw said. “It’s just to help people understand the basis of privilege as well because we all have different privileges depending on who we are.”
The conference, held March 11-14, is during UND’s spring break. Students will be transported to Kentucky on March 8 for a “1.5 day pre-conference immersion experience.” The seminar will only include two post-conference two-hour classes in March before it’s completed.
While this year’s conference in Louisville, Ky., is less than 300 miles away from UND, the conference location changes each year. Outlaw said she plans to continue the seminar in the coming years.
Outlaw confirmed to Campus Reform that the cost of the conference registration and travel is taken care of by UND, and the 10 students will not have to pay any additional fee to take the seminar.
The seminar can count for credit in sociology or Africana studies, according to Outlaw.
UND officials did not respond to a request for comment from Campus Reform on how the money for the conference is provided.
Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @K_Schallhorn
Recommended For You
|December 13th, 2014||#30|
Join Date: Aug 2012
I wonder if this had anything to do with Notre Dame's decision to host the conference. Isn't it swell how compassionate and tolerant Jews are, that they will actually make the biggest donation in the school's history to this Catholic University?
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 2, 2014
CONTACT: Samantha Friedman, West End Strategy Team
[email protected]; Office: (202) 776-7700; Cell: (202) 215-9260
Philanthropist Tad Taube Announces $6 Million Challenge Grant to Restore Notre Dame de Namur University’s Ralston Hall
Bay Area Taube Philanthropies’ gift is largest NDNU has ever received, is first step in $20 million restoration of historical landmark
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
|May 2nd, 2015||#32|
A Destruction of Robin DiAngelo and the Bogus Concept of White Privilege
Found this comment below a typical garbage column by an anti-white consultant pushing the notion of #whiteprivilege, and creator of #whitefragility epithet for whites who resist her garbage. The point here is that this anti-white cliche-loaded set of anti-white stereotypes is being impressed into the tiny, angry minds of the rising demographics of coloreds. They are being taught, almost in so many words, that everything good that whites have was
1) originally created by non-whites
2) was stolen by whites.
When tens of millions of people with this kind of mindset take power, guess what they're going to do?
a) take everything whites own as restitution
b) kill whites off out of vengeance.
And there's going to be a hell of a lot of misery on the way to that end state.
Yes, white geoncide is the ultimate meaning of and intention behind the bogus concept of 'white privilege.' It's an attempt to inculcate guilt in whites and to intimidate them, while simultaneously stoking genocidal rage in coloreds.
It is jews inciting 'minorities' who are 90+ percent of the world's population (!) to commit genocide against our white race.
Why It's So Hard to Talk to White People About Racism
Dr. Robin DiAngelo explains why white people implode when talking about race.
I am white. I have spent years studying what it means to be white in a society that proclaims race meaningless, yet is deeply divided by race. This is what I have learned: Any white person living in the United States will develop opinions about race simply by swimming in the water of our culture. But mainstream sources -- schools, textbooks, media -- don't provide us with the multiple perspectives we need. Yes, we will develop strong emotionally laden opinions, but they will not be informed opinions. Our socialization renders us racially illiterate. When you add a lack of humility to that illiteracy (because we don't know what we don't know), you get the break-down we so often see when trying to engage white people in meaningful conversations about race. Illiteracy comes from the media denying the lived experiences of whites, which are reflected EVEN in the slanted statistics collected and skewed by the anti-white system.
Mainstream dictionary definitions reduce racism to individual racial prejudice and the intentional actions that result. The people that commit these intentional acts are deemed bad, and those that don't are good. If we are against racism and unaware of committing racist acts, we can't be racist; racism and being a good person have become mutually exclusive. But this definition does little to explain how racial hierarchies are consistently reproduced.
Social scientists understand racism as a multidimensional and highly adaptive system -- a system that ensures an unequal distribution of resources typical socialist claptrap; economic parallel to political - no consideration that whites hugely disporportionately produce those goods, and hugely disproportionately have them redistributed to non-producing blacks and other peoples of failure. nay, because whites work harder, produce more, save more, have more than others, it can only be because of some kind of evil actions on their part - hence racism, the perfect conceptual tool for explaining white success _and_ black failure at the same time. what a godsend! between racial groups. Because whites built and dominate all significant institutions, (often at the expense of and on the uncompensated labor of other groups) blacks have gone from animals crawling around a field stuffing cotton in sacks to the conceivers, creators and builders of the entire nation - only to have their due credit and rewards snatched from them by evil racist whites, their interests are embedded in the foundation of U.S. society. While individual whites may be against racism, they still benefit from the distribution of resources controlled by their group. No acknowledgement that whites conceived and created nearly everything that provides the infrastructure of the lives of all races. All that interests the anti-white is implying that coloreds privileged to live in a wonderful world they could never create or even sustain themselves are somehow owed more than this incredible free-ridership so many of them enjoy (and the rest try to swim here to grab a piece of).
Yes, an individual person of color can sit at the tables of power, but the overwhelming majority of decision-makers will be white. Yes, white people can have problems and face barriers, but systematic racism won't be one of them. This distinction -- between individual prejudice and a system of unequal institutionalized racial power -- is fundamental. One cannot understand how racism functions in the U.S. today if one ignores group power relations.
This is why it is no use arguing with leftists, they are committed to unreason. The left controls the institutions and has for decades. They instituted official anti-white systematic institutionalized RACIAL DISCRIMINATION back in the 1970s, and it has been applied to all companies of any size for five decades now. Yet not a peep about this - even though it fits precisely what she is talking about. Leftists have the power, have had the power for decades -- all academia, media, government bureaucracy sing DiAngelo's anti-white tune -- yet they pretend they are fighting the power. No reasoned argument or evidence can reach them, they simply dismiss it out of hand.
This systemic and institutional control allows those of us who are white in North America to live in a social environment that protects and insulates us from race-based stress. Like those kids being forced to mix with blacks in a public school - at gunpoint? First, why should whites endure race-based stress? They created America. Why shouldn't whites protect their children? Why should they be denied the constitutional protection afforded by free association to secure their living-spaces against nigger criminality? Yet this woman would prefer to see whites rapes and murdered, and she brazenly denies that the system is biased against whites, which is obviously the case since it promotes forced mixing in a thousand ways, all against the express wishes of the white population, reflected in its votes and its behavior. We have organized society to reproduce and reinforce our racial interests and perspectives. Whites have always voted to shut our borders and against legal discrimination against whites, yet both policies remain in place. What this woman is saying is plain wrong. She knows that, which makes her a liar. Further, we are centered in all matters deemed normal, universal, benign, neutral and good. Apparently this anti-white thinks we should replace, say, western medicine with voodoo or witch doctors. Thus, we move through a wholly racialized world with an unracialized identity (e.g. white people can represent all of humanity, people of color can only represent their racial selves). We move through a world we created for our own kind. Like every other animal from beaver to honeybee does. It's only a problem when whites do it. Challenges to this identity become highly stressful and even intolerable. The following are examples of the kinds of challenges that trigger racial stress for white people:
Suggesting that a white person's viewpoint comes from a racialized frame of reference (challenge to objectivity);
People of color talking directly about their own racial perspectives (challenge to white taboos on talking openly about race);
People of color choosing not to protect the racial feelings of white people in regards to race (challenge to white racial expectations and need/entitlement to racial comfort);
People of color not being willing to tell their stories or answer questions about their racial experiences (challenge to the expectation that people of color will serve us);
A fellow white not providing agreement with one's racial perspective (challenge to white solidarity);
Receiving feedback that one's behavior had a racist impact (challenge to white racial innocence);
Suggesting that group membership is significant (challenge to individualism);
An acknowledgment that access is unequal between racial groups (challenge to meritocracy);
Being presented with a person of color in a position of leadership (challenge to white authority);
Being presented with information about other racial groups through, for example, movies in which people of color drive the action but are not in stereotypical roles, or multicultural education (challenge to white centrality).
All these amount to whites are guilty for everything and need to be punished. They need to be discredited and disrespected so that they can be softened up for dispossession of their worldly goods and finally genocide. They committed the crime of proving they were better than browntown, and for that they must die.
Not often encountering these challenges, we withdraw, defend, cry, argue, minimize, ignore, and in other ways push back to regain our racial position and equilibrium. I term that push back white fragility.
She rejects the concept of legitimate white claims or reactions to her anti-white agenda a priori. That is, she rejects those in theory. Whites are guilty. That is her position. There is nothing they can do or say that will change that. They need to just shut up and do what she says.
This concept came out of my on-going experience leading discussions on race, racism, white privilege and white supremacy with primarily white audiences. It became clear over time that white people have extremely low thresholds for enduring any discomfort associated with challenges to our racial worldviews. We can manage the first round of challenge by ending the discussion through platitudes -- usually something that starts with "People just need to," or "Race doesn't really have any meaning to me," or "Everybody's racist." Scratch any further on that surface, however, and we fall apart.
Blaming whites for things they aren't responsible for while failing to hold blacks accountable for things they are will have that effect on normal people, especially when you don't allow a second side to your 'discussion' which is actually a monologue.
Socialized into a deeply internalized sense of superiority garbage, they are merely using their sense organs to see that whites look, smell, act better than blacks and browns. diangelo, again, denies, implicitly, a priori the possibility of legitimate white superiority pretty much across the board. but that's the case, no matter which measure you want to use. and entitlement that we are either not consciously aware of or can never admit to ourselves, we become highly fragile in conversations about race. Yeah, people are really fragile when you harangue them in a tendentious monologue you've mislabeled a discussion. And the subject of your jeremiad is why whites are an evil destructive race which needs to disappear. We experience a challenge to our racial worldview as a challenge to our very identities as good, moral people. It also challenges our sense of rightful place in the hierarchy. Thus, we perceive any attempt to connect us to the system of racism as a very unsettling and unfair moral offense. They correctly perceive that as there's nothing you can point to in white behavior that is blameworthy, you are going to make things up in order to take something from them, both intangible things like self-respect, but also money and opportunities. And they know that, unlike lying you, your anti-white attacks are backed by the system and its legal authorities.
The following patterns make it difficult for white people to understand racism as a system and lead to the dynamics of white fragility. While they do not apply to every white person, they are well-documented overall:
Segregation: Most whites live, grow, play, learn, love, work and die primarily in social and geographic racial segregation. Yet, our society does not teach us to see this as a loss. Is it a loss? Most whites marry whites. Whites who move are likelier to move to whiter areas, reflecting their preferences. Why are you denying the validity of white existence as whites in a white world? Why are you so bent on destroying whites' comfort in their own white society? Why do you consider white behavior and preferences as inherently invalid? Who says forced association and mongrelization are good things? Pause for a moment and consider the magnitude of this message: We lose nothing of value by having no cross-racial relationships. Pause for a moment and consider the magnitude of this message: nothing is lost when people of failure invade a white area. All white experience shows something very great is lost, since whites move out wherever the presence of blacks and browns becomes too strong. Those feelings and decisions must be invalid, since this "expert" doesn't even consider them. And we know what should would say if she did. Why is the white preference inherently invalid but the non-white preference inherently valid? The entire record of muds expanding from big cities to suburbs is the destruction of those suburbs, the loss of civility, standards, the decline in property values. All related to race, 100%. But goes entirely unmentioned by this woman. White preferences are inherently invalid. White experiences with blacks and browns don't matter and must not be taken into account. Only the 'minority' POV is valid and should be respected. In fact, the whiter our schools and neighborhoods are, the more likely they are to be seen as "good." No, the more likely they are to be good. Which results in their being perceived as good. Again - this woman denies white superiority a priori. Wherever whites may seem to be superior, it's just that. A racist trick! Not sure how it's carried off, since the media are uniformly owned by jews and anti-white in their treatment of these things, but we'll leave it as an inexplicable mystery. The obvious truth, the hypothesis that satisfies Occam's razor, is that whites simply are superior. As individuals. And in the kinds of neighborhoods and cities they create. People of pigeon are drawn to their areas because they are obviously much better than the ones the pigeon people can create for themselves. The implicit message is that there is no inherent value in the presence or perspectives of people of Color. This is an example of the relentless messages of white superiority that circulate all around us, shaping our identities and worldviews. Where is it circulating? In the media that hide the race of black and brown criminals, and go out of their way to denounce white racism literally every day of the year? DiAngelo's explanations dissatisfy Mr Occam. She always takes the opposite approach: looks for the most convoluted explanation that explains the given facts. Whites are manifestly superior - and colored behavior, which we are supposed to respect, right?, shows that: if whites are evil haters and racists, why do people of pigeon continually flood their areas? If whites are terrible, shouldn't the pigeon races be trying to escape that? I mean, don't people try to escape terrible things, rather than hang out with them? It is a sign of how far gone our civilization is that people like DiAngelo rise to public prominence pushing irrational, bigoted nonsense like she is.
The Good/Bad Binary: The most effective adaptation of racism over time is the idea that racism is conscious bias held by mean people. If we are not aware of having negative thoughts about people of color, don't tell racist jokes, are nice people, and even have friends of color, then we cannot be racist. Thus, a person is either racist or not racist; if a person is racist, that person is bad; if a person is not racist, that person is good. Although racism does of course occur in individual acts, these acts are part of a larger system that we all participate in. The focus on individual incidences prevents the analysis that is necessary in order to challenge this larger system. The good/bad binary is the fundamental misunderstanding driving white defensiveness about being connected to racism. We simply do not understand how socialization and implicit bias work. You can't even name one open racist in government. I mean, you can't name one pro-white racist. Plenty of anti-white racists. Your claims of system bias don't hold water for anyone who reads the news. How many trillions of dollars extracted from white taxpayers have been funnelled to people of pigeon? Whites literally have years of their lives devoted to subsidizing the pigeon people we are told are the victims of this system. It is a foul joke.
Individualism: Whites are taught to see themselves as individuals, rather than as part of a racial group. Individualism enables us to deny that racism is structured into the fabric of society. The USA was 90% white until 1960. This means there can be no difference between whiteness and the society it builds and racism. Which implies, since racism is 'bad,' that whites themselves are bad, and inherently build bad societies. But the problem is with the person who hates whites. Not whites themselves. This erases our history and hides the way in which wealth has accumulated over generations and benefits us, as a group, today. It also allows us to distance ourselves from the history and actions of our group. Thus we get very irate when we are "accused" of racism, because as individuals, we are "different" from other white people and expect to be seen as such; we find intolerable any suggestion that our behavior or perspectives are typical of our group as a whole. Back to the old blacks thought up and built everything, but whites stole it from them thru slavery and redlining. This is simply history-flavored trolling.
Entitlement to racial comfort: In the dominant position, whites are almost always racially comfortable and thus have developed unchallenged expectations to remain so. Well, god forbid whites be comfortable in a land they build, like beavers or rabbits or any other animal. What a horrible idea. Whites build something nice and be comfortable in their nest. She wants whites to be uncomfortable as the mud-crowd is, and to justify her hate, she concocts bogus historical explanations to account for white success and black failure. The jewish-communist term 'racism' will of course feature prominently. The same jews who created the anti-white concept of racism also created the concept of communism, which led to the murder of tens of millions of innocent white men in the 20th century. That systemic prejudice couldn't possibility be linked to the agenda behind 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism' and such, now, could it? I mean, just because the same jewish bloodlines are promoting it? (Along with people of failure and white mals [short for malocclusives] like DiAngelo, assuming she is white.)
We have not had to build tolerance for racial discomfort and thus when racial discomfort arises, whites typically respond as if something is "wrong," and blame the person or event that triggered the discomfort (usually a person of color). This blame results in a socially-sanctioned array of responses towards the perceived source of the discomfort, including: penalization; retaliation; isolation and refusal to continue engagement. Since racism is necessarily uncomfortable in that it is oppressive, white insistence on racial comfort guarantees racism will not be faced except in the most superficial of ways.
How would you feel if I blamed you, DiAngelo, for the drastic decline in the honeybee population? You'd be all, that had nothing to do with me. So it is with whites and nons. Whites have nothing to do with the failure of people of pigeon. They need to take responsibility for their failures - or not. But at the least, they need to get off whitey's EBT train and go back to the shitholes they created for themselves.
Racial Arrogance: Most whites have a very limited understanding of racism because we have not been trained to think in complex ways about it and because it benefits white dominance not to do so. Yeah, if there's one thing no white ever hears about, certainly not every minute of every day of his life, it's racism. It's totally not like the media don't spend every single session blaming white attitudes for black behavior. If blacks riot, white racism is the reason. Blacks are basically controlled as via voodoo doll by white behavior. Which of course is the reverse of the truth: white attitudes are a response -- always -- to proven patterns of black behavior. Yet, we have no compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought complexly about race. Whites generally feel free to dismiss these informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, or seek more information.
Racial Belonging: White people enjoy a deeply internalized, largely unconscious sense of racial belonging in U.S. society. In virtually any situation or image deemed valuable in dominant society, whites belong. The interruption of racial belonging is rare and thus destabilizing and frightening to whites and usually avoided. How terrible it is, the thought that even one white, anywhere, should feel comfortable and unhated and at peace. We must change this.
Psychic freedom: Because race is constructed as residing in people of color, whites don't bear the social burden of race. We move easily through our society without a sense of ourselves as racialized. Yeah, well the key there is it's our society. Not theirs. We didn't vote to open borders. Your judge pals did. And you prate about the system favoring us! You lie. Race is for people of color to think about -- it is what happens to "them" -- they can bring it up if it is an issue for them (although if they do, we can dismiss it as a personal problem, the race card, or the reason for their problems). Most of them came here of their own free will - and against ours. Apparently they prefer living among racist whites to nigger normal in Nigeria. Apparently whites have some positive qualities that outweigh this mysterious, ghostly 'racism' you speak of with such religious fervor. This allows whites much more psychological energy to devote to other issues and prevents us from developing the stamina to sustain attention on an issue as charged and uncomfortable as race. We have our own problems, and they are on rather a higher level than bushmen from Africa. Why should we lower ourselves to their concerns? They already freeride off our society, indeed most of them would not even be alive were it not for our science and techology. These facts don't go away because you anti-white genocidalists obscure them.
Constant messages that we are more valuable: Living in a white dominant context, we receive constant messages that we are better and more important than people of color. Not through the media we don't. All we ever hear is about the glory of diversity and the horror of racism. For example: our centrality in history textbooks, historical representations and perspectives; our centrality in media and advertising; our teachers, role-models, heroes and heroines; everyday discourse on "good" neighborhoods and schools and who is in them; popular TV shows centered around friendship circles that are all white; religious iconography that depicts God, Adam and Eve, and other key figures as white. While one may explicitly reject the notion that one is inherently better than another, one cannot avoid internalizing the message of white superiority, as it is ubiquitous in mainstream culture. Whites are consistently pictured as evil racists on the wrong side of history in these forums, and colored achievements are presented wildly out of proportion to their actual size. Real white achievement is denigrated or simply ignored in order to promote sub-mediocrities because they are colored. It has been this way for decades. As for superiority, why don't you take on that question directly, since you're so interested in it. Find some measures of it, then find ones where whites _aren't_ objectively superior. Everybody thinks whites are superior because they are. You know it. You're fronting, as your coon heroes say. We proud whites call your bluff.
These privileges and the white fragility that results prevent us from listening to or comprehending the perspectives of people of color and bridging cross-racial divides. The antidote to white fragility is on-going and life-long, and includes sustained engagement, humility, and education. We can begin by:
Being willing to tolerate the discomfort associated with an honest appraisal and discussion of our internalized superiority and racial privilege.
Challenging our own racial reality by acknowledging ourselves as racial beings with a particular and limited perspective on race.
Attempting to understand the racial realities of people of color through authentic interaction rather than through the media or unequal relationships.
Taking action to address our own racism, the racism of other whites, and the racism embedded in our institutions -- e.g., get educated and act.
Why should we agree to have your colored landfill deposited on our front lawns, our workspaces, and in our souls? Why should we allow our superior race to be trashed by people of failure and their hate-filled apologists. We don't need blacks. We don't need browns. But they sure seem to need us. If whites are so terrible, then the most obvious solution is to let the races go their own ways. But you don't support that. For one, it would put anti-white liars like you out of a job. For two, it would show that your arguments are wrong. The all-white state would succeed, even if placed in the worst geography on earth, while the black/brown would fail, even if given the optimal terrain. What's more, I assert you are well aware of this, and the proof is you won't allow racial separation, not into two states, not even into two cities. Because it will show all your fine words to be lies. You are simply a racial traitor, a sellout making a career out of abusing whites and lying about them, torturing them and attempting to bring about their genocide. You know what you deserve, DiAngelo? . . . You do, don't you
"Getting it" when it comes to race and racism challenges our very identities as good white people. It's an ongoing and often painful process of seeking to uncover our socialization at its very roots. It asks us to rebuild this identity in new and often uncomfortable ways. But I can testify that it is also the most exciting, powerful, intellectually stimulating and emotionally fulfilling journey I have ever undertaken. It has impacted every aspect of my life -- personal and professional. Translation: Hating whites is trendy and profitable. The way to be safe from charges of racism is to make them first and loudest.
I have a much deeper and more complex understanding of how society works. I can challenge much more racism in my daily life, and I have developed cherished and fulfilling cross-racial friendships I did not have before.
I do not expect racism to end in my lifetime, and I know that I continue to have problematic racist patterns and perspectives. Yet, I am also confident that I do less harm to people of color than I used to. This is not a minor point of growth, for it impacts my lived experience and that of the people of color who interact with me. If you are white I urge you to take the first step -- let go of your racial certitude and reach for humility. Your humility is false, your chutzpah is real. You profit off spreading hate. You are contemptible.
By Dr. Robin DiAngelo, associate professor of critical multicultural and social justice education at Westfield State University.
|May 3rd, 2015||#33|
CHRISTIAN COLLEGES BUYING INTO ‘WHITE PRIVILEGE’ ARE DISTORTING THE GOSPEL
by TJ JAN - SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY on MAY 1, 2015
“White privilege” is all the rage on college campuses around the country, even Christian colleges like Moody Bible Institute, Azusa Pacific University and Seattle Pacific University.
tali-hairston-165x228SPU’s own Tali Hairston, director of the Perkins Center for Reconciliation, recently told Christianity Today that white evangelical students “have not had to understand” that they have a “deficit of cultural literacy” when it comes to their own privilege.
Schooling themselves in white privilege is the Christian thing to do, he says.
As an evangelical with more “cultural literacy” than the average white person, I’d like to ask Hairston and those who think like him to reconsider their assumptions about the core of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I am a minority – half Chinese – and have been deeply influenced by international service to the poorest around the world in places like Thailand and Honduras.
My Chinese ancestors barely made it into the United States on the eve of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. I was the only Chinese-American in my high school and I am the only minority in my immediate group of friends.
My “white” side comes from Polish and Irish stock, hardly ethnic groups to which American and world history have been kind.
From this vantage point, I’ve grown deeply skeptical – and frankly, quite tired – of SPU’s hubristic fixation on liberation theology’s social justice agenda.
The assault on “white privilege” is nothing more than an ad hominem fallacy, built upon incredible assumptions about a diverse group of nearly 224 million people as of 2010, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Liberation theology sinfully wrests Christ and the message of grace into a political tool and this debased gospel wrongfully fixates our spiritual gaze on the temporal rather than on the transcendent.
Instead of speaking directly about the economic, social and governance issues that may exacerbate America’s inequalities of wealth and opportunity, the argument for white privilege instead assaults a one-dimensional image of the Oppressive White Man.
If such an approach is unacceptable in philosophical or logical discourse, why have we allowed it to gain so much traction in our modern discussions of poverty and inequality?
To point the finger at all whites is illogical, unhelpful, and downright offensive.
Try explaining white privilege to the 5.1 million white children living in poverty in the United States, as estimated in 2013 by Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Kids Count Data Center. There are deeper systemic problems to be fixed than the perceived aristocratic superiority of a supposedly homogeneous group of Americans called “whites.”
hoodie.TJ_Jan.FacebookThough I’m no biblical scholar, I don’t think that you need a master’s of divinity to see that Christ’s purpose was to demonstrate supernatural redemption and grace, not primarily promote fleshly transformation.
At the core of the gospel lies the truth of a transcendent Savior who lived the life – and died the death – that we could not do ourselves, so that we might be reconciled to him. Out of this supremely powerful narrative flows the motivation to love one’s neighbor and care for the poor, widows and orphans.
Instead of leaning into this transcendent story of grace, Christian social justice as understood today, motivated by liberation theology, debases the gospel.
It insists that the primary mission of Christianity and Christian action in the world is to promote distinctly progressive and occasionally Marxist incarnations of civil society, government and economic structures.
Using the gospel in such a manner irresponsibly paves the way for endless partisan applications of Christ’s message. When we do this, we cease to be Christians who do politics and transform into politicians and activists who happen to be Christian.
Perhaps I direly misunderstand the basic message of liberation theology, Christian social justice or the arguments against white privilege. Perhaps I just do not understand how I have been racially disadvantaged and am therefore not sufficiently frustrated.
Am I so blinded by some sort of hybrid white privilege that I am unable to exercise “proper” Christian solidarity with the disenfranchised?
But whether you agree with me or call me part of the problem, we as a Christian community should be able to agree that we need to start having conversations about our conversations, rather than dismissing alternate viewpoints as heresy, racism or ignorance.
If I’m being invited to freely participate in “the conversation” about race, religion and politics, why is my voice not being heard? Surely we can do better than a never ending echo-chamber.
College Fix contributor TJ Jan is a student at Seattle Pacific University.
Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
IMAGES: TJ Jan, Seattle Pacific University
|May 4th, 2015||#34|
A Logical Case For The Nonexistence Of White Privilege And Institutional Racism
Dave Nappi 241 Comments
Some people find it easy to agree that institutional racism still exists in American culture. Or that white privilege exists. Others, such as myself, say that it simply isn’t there.
Events such as the Civil Rights Movement, laws such as the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act, and legal cases such as Brown v. Board of Education were brought into existence to ensure equal treatment of all races within America. They have helped to end most forms of racial inequality and thus to end institutional racism.
However, many still contend that institutional racism, as well as white privilege, are real. To understand the subject better, it’s best to look at most arguments made about institutionalized racism and white privilege and dissect them.
Institutional Racism is “any system of inequality based on race.”
With so many laws in place to ensure that racial equality is practiced among all institutions in government, education, and business, we have to ask about the evidence regarding institutional racism.
When looking in the news, we can see events such as the George Zimmerman trial and can conclude that this would be a perfect example of institutional racism in government and public policy. It’s a clear example of white favoritism over the black minority. Many have asked, “What if Zimmerman was black and Martin white?” However, there are similar cases that answer this very question, such as the Roderick Scott case, involving a black man who shot and killed a white teenager and was found not guilty due to Stand Your Ground laws.
Continual inconsistencies such as this can be found, depending on where you look. Since the news media is not the most reliable source on giving proper instances of institutional racism, we can turn to the criminal-justice system for a better insight, as many claim that it’s a perfect example. With all the data collected regarding race and crime in the US, it becomes clear that data and statistics on the matter often conflict. One study says race and crime tend to even out between all races, while others say that it doesn’t. It’s still up for debate on what exactly is true. Statistics showing instances of institutionalized racism in the criminal-justice system are also unreliable.
So where can we look to get a better understanding? We can certainly try and dive into literature surrounding the issues of institutional racism in the US.
When looking into many written works regarding the topic, most literature is also linked with examination of “white privilege.” White privilege refers to the myriad social advantages and benefits that come with being a member of the dominant race. In the book Privilege, Power, and Difference (rated 4 stars on Amazon), we find that the author, Allan G. Johnson, (Ph.d. in sociology) “links theory with engaging examples in ways that enable readers to see the underlying nature and consequences of privilege and their connection to it.”
This means that it links theory with people’s personal experiences and what they have seen as institutional racism and how people with “privilege” can identify with them. My first problem lies here. One has to remember that a personal experience is seen as a subjective observation—one that is not concrete and is thus subject to bias. An objective observation would be something that can be observed independently of personal bias. However, suggesting that their personal experiences are invalid due to no concrete evidence and possible bias is to marginalize their personal experience and deem it unimportant. Fair enough, but what kind of scientific theory would rely on subjective observation rather than objective observation?
That would be critical race theory. Also known as CRT, critical race theory is described as:
an academic discipline focused upon the application of race, law, and power.
Key elements of CRT include, but are not limited to: the critique of liberalism, revisionist interpretations of American civil-rights law and progress, essentialism philosophy, white privilege, appeal to emotion, and “naming one’s own reality” or “counter-storytelling.”
From a rational standpoint, CRT seems to utilize logical fallacies and aggressive tactics to argue issues of race.
Camara Phyllis Jones defines institutionalized racism as “the structures, policies, practices, and norms resulting in differential access to the goods, services, and opportunities of society by race….It is structural, having been absorbed into our institutions of custom, practice and law, so there need not be an identifiable offender.”
I felt the need to highlight the last part of that sentence. This is basically saying that institutionalized racism is so real, we don’t need evidence to point it out. Not only does CRT admit to using appeal to emotion and “naming one’s own reality,” but, it also utilizes what is known as the “bandwagon fallacy“—appealing to popularity or the fact that because many people believe or do something, it must be true. It’s the same as arguing, “If Bigfoot isn’t real, how come so many people have seen Bigfoot?”
So where does this use of logical fallacies stem from? If you’re getting confused, let me clarify. Modern racial politics engages discourse on the topic of institutionalized racism and white privilege, in which most examples in contemporary America are mostly proven by critical race theory, which itself utilizes logical fallacies and aggressive discourse tactics which originally stem from critical theory.
What is critical theory? Well, there are two definitions. You have the literary and the philosophical. Literary critical theory focuses on knowledge via interpretation to understand the meaning of human texts and symbolic expressions. The philosophical is defined as a social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole. But why would it aim to challenge and change society as a whole? If you read the link, you’d see that the beginning of the second paragraph states:
In philosophy, the term critical theory describes the Frankfurt School, which was developed in Germany in the 1930s.
Critical theory, it shows, is a school of thought that was developed with a political ideology and possible social agenda in mind. Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong. People have their issues with different political ideologies all the time. We’ve all seen how rabid Republicans and Democrats can get during debates. So critical theory is used in discourse to bring about social change.
But what exactly are the methods used by critical theory in order to come to conclusions for change? As shown in the Qualitative Research Guideline Project, the methodology is focused on getting people to discuss and reflect on personal experiences, and the researcher provides a discourse for change. In short: using subjective observation to cause real social change. Not objective observation, but subjective—an observation we already know to be biased and thus not entirely reliable.
Using something that might not be real to change something that is real. That almost seems like circular logic. Why would it use logical fallacies to incite debate? My opinion is because the core of critical theory is reliant on a logical fallacy itself.
So what does this say about critical theory, Institutionalized Racism, and White Privilege?
To me, is says that the notion of modern institutionalized racism and white privilege can only be conceived and understood as narrative reality if one allows themselves to stop using logical reasoning and start jumping though illogical hoops with the triad of fallacies presented by critical theory and CRT.
It also shows that critical theory isn’t a theory. It’s a psychological tactic composed of handpicked logical fallacies with the purpose of destroying the very idea of opposition toward critical theorists from the mind of the critical theorists’ target population. It also aims to degrade the social cohesion of the target population by convincing them that their social cohesion, indeed their very society, doesn’t exist and therefore shouldn’t exist. At the same time, it claims that social cohesion of the target population has created a social constraint toward the target’s minority population that cannot be found to exist outside of one’s own perception.
When I reflect on the fact that most people who implore me to believe that modern institutional racism and white privilege exist, it’s imperative to remember that they utilize these same flawed psychological tactics. As someone who is very outspoken about modern racial politics, I usually have a conversation that goes like this:
PoC: You have offended me by being racist (appeal to emotion) as you have not recognized your white privilege (subjective observation).
Dave: You’re making a subjective observation regarding my “privilege” and are using the appeal to emotion by claiming that I need to think about your feelings.
PoC: You are incapable of understanding because you are not thinking about my feelings (shame on you for not using the appeal to emotion) and are being biased in regard to your white privilege (shame on your for not using subjective observation).
So many of these arguments consist of two or more logical fallacies being used against me. I point out the logical fallacies, then my opinion is marginalized, because as they claim, I’m not using these same logical fallacies to agree with them. Can you understand why these conversations frustrate me?
|April 28th, 2017||#36|
[facts show 'white privilege' is the opposite of the truth: whites, white men in particular, are heavily discriminated against by law, often federal law - as well as being treated as an evil category by the (((media)))]
Look at what America’s white supremacist ideology has garnered for women’s entitlement:
1. Affirmative Action for women
2. Generous 8A government set-aside business contracts for female owned businesses
3. No required military service or selective service for women
4. Government anti-discrimination laws for women
5. Title VII and Title IX laws for women
6. Rape shield laws protect female liars in court
7. Generous government benefits for single mothers
8. Men get screwed in child custody cases
9. Taxpayer financed Abortion on demand
10. Government sponsored homeless and rehab shelters for women
11. All health insurance policies require universal coverage for female-specific problems
12. Ridiculous feminine political correctness studies and speech codes in public colleges and universities and government offices
13. National Women’s history month
14. Sexual harassment laws for women
15. Special Violence against Women Laws
16. Most cushy government jobs employ women
17. Equal Pay Act of 1963 for women
18. Lowered physical standards by law for female policemen and firemen and soldier
19. Female-only institutions allowed by law, male-only institutions outlawed
20. Battered woman defense allowed in first degree murder court cases
21. Hate speech laws protecting women and other federal protected class groups
22. Women are a majority of voters in a totalitarian democracy
23. Men pay 96% of all alimony, women pay 4%
24. Paycheck Fairness Act
25. Paid family and maternity leave for women
26. Single Payer Health Insurance for Women and Children
27. Living Wage for women, increased federal minimum wage
28. Enhanced Social Security benefits for women with children
29. Federal Health Insurance for illegal alien women
30. Federal Funding for Planned Parenthood
31. Mandatory health insurance plan coverage for women’s issues, including affordable contraception, preventive care, child care, and safe and legal abortion
32. Foreign wars and intrigues to promote female entitlements across the globe
33. Special federal and state monitoring and enforcement of laws prohibiting violence against women
Don’t forget about Afro-Black entitlements, again courtesy of American white supremacy:
1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
2. Government 8A set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
3. Deliberate broadcast media and government misrepresentation of violent felony Afro-black crime wave
4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, NBPP, BLM, BLA, Crips, Nation of Islam)
6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and afro-black scholarship programs
7. Unprosecuted afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy federal government employment
14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich protected class people
17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
18. Afro-black dominated city’s bailout by county, state and federal taxpayer
19. Afro-black history month
20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black false flag hate crimes
24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
28. Afro-black athlete and rapper thugs glorified by mass media
29. Afro-black on white people crime rate is lopsided and extreme
30. President of the US promotes undue entitlements for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
31. Afro-black only organizations allowed by law, white-only organizations outlawed
32. BLM terrorist demand and receive reduced policing in black majority areas
33. Feds assist Afro-blacks to extort money and concessions from local city tax payers
34. White Privilege crap taught in public schools and universities.
35. Afro-black wilding assaults, flash mob robberies, mall riots, and knockout game is rampant and unprosecuted.
36. Black scholarships allowed in public colleges, white scholarships are illegal.
37. Feds give tax money to immigrant negroes to bribe them not to join ISIS.
38. Lowered academic standards for afro-blacks and other diversity people in public service jobs
39. Federal government coerces private businesses to implement diversity policies, or else suffer federal prosecution, denial of tax breaks and business licenses, and denial of federal contracts.
40. Criminal blacks conspire to assassinate police, no hate crime charges and no domestic terrorism label
41. Obama signs EO forcing public schools to stop disciplining black thugs in school
42. Blacks commit hoax hate crimes, and never are prosecuted for doing it.
43. Blacks receive government sponsored grants to attend college, white Christian people get primarily loans.