Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old December 9th, 2013 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Structural and Institutional Racism are Real - and Whites are the Victim

susan H 3 days ago
@kellygreen @Truth Teller being a poor white woman with a very young child, homeless, penniless, i went to every agency there was begging for help and I will tell you word for word what said to me and the baby in my arms...."honey you are the wrong color, there is nothing we can do to help you. Try and find a friend or family to stay with or find yourself a black man and the system will help you, but all we can do is file a report that you have a little girl who is homeless and the state will take her away, place her with a new family and you will be out on your bottom with nothing--not even your daughter." This was said to me by a sympathetic BLACK social worker. She was an amazing woman but even she recognized that being poor doesn't count if you're white. This woman helped me find a room to sleep in where nobody would notice us and put me in touch with someone to do some work cleaning out low income houses when the tenants vacated and even she, a black woman, professional and compassionate, warned me of the nastiness I would find in cleaning these houses occupied majoritively by low income families of color. Shi**y diapers stuffed into air vents, sinks and bathtubs literally caked with grease, holes in the walls, ripped up horrid smelling carpets...if I could handle it I would have enough in maybe a week to get a bus ticket out of that hell. No, no individual race is worse than any other in poverish situations but the simple fact is white privilege is grossly blown out of proportion and nobody cares, you complain and suddenly you are the racist.

http://www.salon.com/2013/12/02/thre...ment=121192039
 
Old December 9th, 2013 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[from same link above]

Republic1971 3 days ago
Try looking up statistics on interracial FBI crime sometime. The numbers are not even close. Even though blacks make up 16 percent of the population.

In case you did not know there can be racism without oppression. Plenty of documented racist acts done against people of all colors. The issue is the professor only see racism in any form done against blacks. Which is why the will never win her suit. Educated teach all forms of racism or do not teach the subject at all. Of course students have an issue with selective teaching. So would the black students if she only talked about black violent racism against whites.

I should know all about it. Why? That's because my father was murdered in seventies for just being white. In fact when asked why they attacked him they stated was just looking for the next white guy. No justice for my family. My family was sacrificed to avoid a race war by Major White of Boston. In fact would not even let us pull plug on vegetative brain dead father(By order the Mayor). The case is documented, written about and change state law(Boston MA). My family could not even talk to the press(gag order). Same thing in LA Riots when white people were targeted for just being white. Plenty of documented cases in that riot. cases such as the two black guys who covered a white 13-year-old with gasoline and lit him on fire, saying “You get what you deserve, white boy” (Kansas City, Mo.) Other way around it's a hate crime. 20 black kids who beat up white Mathew Owens sitting on his own porch “for Trayvon” (Mobile, Ala.). Nor do you seem to understand is 16 percent of population commits 50 percent of all the murders in USA. Of which some are based solely on the persons skin color. Happens everyday just does not get reported. Because of this belief that Blacks cannot commit a violent racist act. Pretty much same belief as this professor.

So we see the media, the law, and the politicians work together to create a White-hostile environment. That, if anything, is exactly what structural racism or institutional racism means.
 
Old December 9th, 2013 #3
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

For example, the government is busy right now attempting to break the solidarity of ethnic communities using HUD as a diversity enforcer. DOT is busily preparing public transport to bring the hoodlums to your bedroom communities. Read Victor Davis Hanson's laments about violent crime in rural areas.
 
Old December 15th, 2013 #4
Jason 916
☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆
 
Jason 916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N. California
Posts: 2,374
Jason 916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
susan H 3 days ago
@kellygreen @Truth Teller being a poor white woman with a very young child, homeless, penniless, i went to every agency there was begging for help and I will tell you word for word what said to me and the baby in my arms...."honey you are the wrong color, there is nothing we can do to help you. Try and find a friend or family to stay with or find yourself a black man and the system will help you, but all we can do is file a report that you have a little girl who is homeless and the state will take her away, place her with a new family and you will be out on your bottom with nothing--not even your daughter." This was said to me by a sympathetic BLACK social worker. She was an amazing woman but even she recognized that being poor doesn't count if you're white. This woman helped me find a room to sleep in where nobody would notice us and put me in touch with someone to do some work cleaning out low income houses when the tenants vacated and even she, a black woman, professional and compassionate, warned me of the nastiness I would find in cleaning these houses occupied majoritively by low income families of color. Shi**y diapers stuffed into air vents, sinks and bathtubs literally caked with grease, holes in the walls, ripped up horrid smelling carpets...if I could handle it I would have enough in maybe a week to get a bus ticket out of that hell. No, no individual race is worse than any other in poverish situations but the simple fact is white privilege is grossly blown out of proportion and nobody cares, you complain and suddenly you are the racist.

http://www.salon.com/2013/12/02/thre...ment=121192039
Disgusting, the "advice" from the blecck woman. Not really sure why the White woman said she was "amazing." Only if the black woman was being sarcastic, then maybe.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
Support the church? What the f**k for?
 
Old December 18th, 2013 #5
luftwaffensoldat
Witness to Genocide
 
luftwaffensoldat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Where there are no PAKIS and NIGGERS
Posts: 823
luftwaffensoldat
Default

Niggers always blame their various social pathologies on slavery and discrimination. The congoids of Afreaka were neither enslaved nor discriminated against by the white man, but are many times more violent than their nigger cousins in America. Of course, the 'groids and white race traitors blame European colonialism for nigger failure on the dark continent; but this is an obviously untenable explanation, because congoids are much worse off in their own independent countries than they were under European colonial rule. The same applies to nigger social pathology in America, which is obviously not because of slavery and discrimination because it has only gotten significantly worse since the passage of civil rights legislation in 1964.

The truth is that nigger social pathology is the result of a number of major factors, predominantly biological/genetic, but also cultural. The first is the average nigger IQ of 85; but this cannot be the entire explanation because other low-IQ, low intelligence populations, such as the Hindoos of India, are nowhere near as violent as niggers. In addition to IQ, niggers have higher circulating testosterone than whites or east Asians, which makes them more impulsive, with a low future time orientation. The third factor is a nigger "kulcha" that institutionalizes and celebrates violence. This is a more realistic analysis of all major factors underlying nigger pathology; but niggers being niggers, they will never acknowledge this.
 
Old December 18th, 2013 #6
James Dovery
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,020
James Dovery
Default

All this shit to pick cotton?

Talk about a raw deal!
 
Old December 18th, 2013 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason 916 View Post
Disgusting, the "advice" from the blecck woman. Not really sure why the White woman said she was "amazing." Only if the black woman was being sarcastic, then maybe.
The only time whites are directly aggressive is against us white nationalists. They lack the confidence to be aggressive against blacks or jews. If they criticize them, they do it with kid gloves and disclaimers. This proves they are conformists and cowards. They are exactly the type Twain depicted in The Mysterious Stranger - stoning a 'witch' to death. Only because every one else is. They personally, 63 out of 67 of them, didn't want to do it, they just didn't have the moral courage to stand on their own opinion. I like to think this is mostly due to the christ cult, but it probably is to a good degree a racial defect.
 
Old December 18th, 2013 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by luftwaffensoldat View Post
Niggers always blame their various social pathologies on slavery and discrimination. The congoids of Afreaka were neither enslaved nor discriminated against by the white man, but are many times more violent than their nigger cousins in America. Of course, the 'groids and white race traitors blame European colonialism for nigger failure on the dark continent; but this is an obviously untenable explanation, because congoids are much worse off in their own independent countries than they were under European colonial rule. The same applies to nigger social pathology in America, which is obviously not because of slavery and discrimination because it has only gotten significantly worse since the passage of civil rights legislation in 1964.

The truth is that nigger social pathology is the result of a number of major factors, predominantly biological/genetic, but also cultural. The first is the average nigger IQ of 85; but this cannot be the entire explanation because other low-IQ, low intelligence populations, such as the Hindoos of India, are nowhere near as violent as niggers. In addition to IQ, niggers have higher circulating testosterone than whites or east Asians, which makes them more impulsive, with a low future time orientation. The third factor is a nigger "kulcha" that institutionalizes and celebrates violence. This is a more realistic analysis of all major factors underlying nigger pathology; but niggers being niggers, they will never acknowledge this.
You're right, but the facts don't matter. The jews have fed them lies about history and everything else, and they believe it with religious faith, and the hate it inspires in them is very real, needs very little pretext to find outlet. Where they are the majority, or a minority that doesn't get punished, they will exercise a terrible revenge on whites they think have wronged them. It's been going on for decades, and has reached warp speed in South Africa. And if you try to post on whites murdered by blacks since 94 vs nigs killed by whites before that, they won't post it.

Whites have gotten weak and soft, and they've lost the mental clarity that used to distinguish them from other races, for their call their softness love when in fact it's just weakness. Blacks are not the animal to be weak around.

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 18th, 2013 at 03:22 AM.
 
Old May 2nd, 2015 #9
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The landscape of Racial Equality in the US: On college entrance, SAT "bonuses" for Blacks & Mestizos ONLY: http://fw.to/o0gCUyh
 
Old May 2nd, 2015 #10
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

This thread is to document the dishonesty and illogic of judeo-leftist claims. They say prejudice is individual but racism is institutional. So blacks can be prejudiced but only whites can be racist - since whites control the institutions. But actual institutional practices are uniformly anti-white. That goes for those that are semi-public or in the gray area between public and private, as with SAT in post above. Leftists make general statements about 'racism' that are refuted by factual specifics, yet they never acknowledge these facts. That's leftist privilege - never having to respond to anything because you control everything. Control all the media and government. So you can pose as The Rebel when you're actually The Man.

We are the rebel. We are the White Men. The System is against us. This is not opinion, this is demonstrable fact, and it's what this thread exists to document. Like anyone cared. But at least it helps any honest men understand what's going on.
 
Old May 4th, 2015 #11
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

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

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.

White privilege

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?

http://thoughtcatalog.com/dave-nappi...tional-racism/
 
Old May 9th, 2015 #12
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Boston University prof flunks 'white masculinity' in controversial tweets

By Maxim Lott



Boston University Professor Saida Grundy's tweets deriding white men are her business, according to the school. (Boston University)
Critics say a newly-hired Boston University professor has crossed the line with recent tweets bashing whites, but the school says it’s simply free speech.

“White masculinity isn’t a problem for america’s colleges, white masculinity is THE problem for america’s colleges,” Saida Grundy, an incoming assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies at Boston University, tweeted in March.

In another tweet from January, she wrote: “Every MLK week I commit myself to not spending a dime in white-owned businesses. and every year i find it nearly impossible.”

In another, she called white males a “problem population.”

“White masculinity isn’t a problem for america’s colleges, white masculinity is THE problem for america’s colleges.”

- Saida Grundy, incoming assistant professor at Boston University

“Why is white America so reluctant to identify white college males as a problem population?” she asked.

The tweets were first noticed by student Nick Pappas, who posted them on his website “SoCawlege.com” and questioned how Grundy could be able to teach a diverse classroom given the racial hostility in her tweets.

“You have to teach college aged white males eventually, no?... this seems like you are unqualified to grade their work as you clearly demonstrate some kind of special bias against them,” he wrote.

Related Image

racisttweet.jpgExpand / Contract
Pappas, a junior at University of Massachusetts Amherst, told FoxNews.com that he hopes to “show the rest of America how nasty people on the far left can get at colleges.”

Those who follow campus politics say they are not shocked.

"I'm not surprised that Boston University is hiring a racist to teach African American Studies," David Horowitz, author of “Reforming our Univerisities” told FoxNews.com. "Anti-white racism is rampant in Black Studies programs which are generally indoctrination programs in left wing politics."

Boston University stands by the professor, who will start working at the college in June.

“Professor Grundy is exercising her right to free speech and we respect her right to do so,” Boston University spokesman Colin Riley said.

Grundy did not respond to a request for comment from FoxNews.com, and has made her twitter account private.

Horowitz said the university’s reaction betrays double-standards on race.

“If she were a white racist rather than an anti-white racist, she would never be hired. Professors are supposed to be experts in some scholarly field, and professionals in their classroom discourse. They don't have a license to indoctrinate students in their prejudices - whether those prejudices are right or left,” he said.

Grundy posted a number of other controversial tweets, for instance claiming that only whites enslaved entire generations of people. “Deal with your white sh*t, white people. slavery is a *YALL* thing,” she said.

Free speech advocates say that Grundy should have a right to her speech, but say the university speech policy is hypocritical because it allows the university to censor offensive or bigoted speech if it wanted to.

“Professor Grundy should and must have the freedom to publicly express her opinions on controversial topics. Unfortunately, though, [she] could be punished if she were to send such tweets through the BU computer network, as the university bans ‘transmitting...offensive’ material,” Robert Shibley of Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) told FoxNews.com.

“In addition, if she were a student, she could also potentially be punished for violating policies banning ‘bigotry, hatred, and intolerance,’ and for not expressing her opinion ‘in good taste and decency.’ … [BU] should eliminate these policies so that it can defend every student and faculty member's right to free speech – not just Professor Grundy's.”

The author, Maxim Lott, can be reached at www.maximlott.com or at [email protected]
 
Old May 9th, 2015 #13
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[why is this structural, one might ask? Because anti-whites like this are given time and treated seriously on controlled mass media where as prowhites like me are not. this below is about as crazy as anything i've seen in 15 years, but it's perfectly consistent with the trajectory]

Morning Roar: Bedtime Reading to Kids “Unfairly Disadvantages” Others

May 8, 2015

by Brian McWilliams

The headline to this article could very well read “statists gone mad!” and be perfectly accurate.

The National Review includes an interview from ABC Radio with Professor Adam Swift of the University of Warwick (UK), and his statements don’t exactly inspire my confidence in that establishment of learning. The Review refers in it’s headline, “Professor: If You Read To Your Kids, You’re ‘Unfairly Disadvantaging’ Others” to one glaring admission from the professor, but there is so very much more to be shocked by.

First, the bedtime reading though.

In an interview with ABC Radio last week, philosopher and professor Adam Swift said that since “bedtime stories activities . . . do indeed foster and produce . . . [desired] familial relationship goods,” he wouldn’t want to ban them, but that parents who “engage in bedtime-stories activities” should definitely at least feel kinda bad about it sometimes: “I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,” he said.

That’s pure insanity – one can’t preclude the betterment of one’s own children on the presumed neglect of other children! What is the alternative? Every baby is ignored – left in a crate without stimulus, or government-sanctioned stimulus?

But the professor doesn’t stop there.

At one point, Swift even flirted with the idea of “simply abolishing the family” as a way of “solving the social justice problem” because “there would be a more level playing field” if we did, but ultimately concluded that “it is in the child’s interest to be parented” and that “parenting a child makes for what we call a distinctive and special contribution to the flourishing and well-being of adults.”

Of course it’s in the child’s best interest to be parented! Only in severe circumstances of abuse and neglect is a child better off out of the home. The picture is horribly bleak when a child becomes the ward of the state. Over 70% of the prison population in California, which has the largest foster population in the States, comes from foster youth. And this man is toying with the notion of abolishing the family system and turning all children into “state” children?

Swift is literally an advocate for the “nanny state” in every sense of the word. This is the inherent danger in trusting government to “equalize” the footing – when and where does it stop? Would a government ever go this far? It’s not out of the realm of possibility in any way. Government is coercive. Government is ever-expanding.

The liberties taken weren’t ripped from us overnight in one fell swoop, but instead siphoned off slowly either by bad voting practices or legislation made under the auspices of the “greater good.”

Swift’s vision is terrifyingly akin to that of Aldous Huxley’s in “Brave New World,” a book which seeks to warn of the nature of totalitarian nanny-state government in which babies are manufactured, nurtured and programmed by the state. That’s not a future any of us wants to live in. …Except psychopath’s like the good professor.

http://lionsofliberty.com/2015/05/08...ntages-others/
nr
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...atherine-timpf
 
Old May 12th, 2015 #15
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[jew ignatiev's last lecture. he just wanted to abolish whiteness, not the actual race. now he more or less admits the truth we already knew: he's a jew promoting white genocide]

Hateful, Racist Progressive JEW Professor: ‘If You are a White Male, You Don’t Deserve to Live!’

May 11, 2015

(NEWSBUSTERS) – Noel Ignatiev, a professor at Massachusetts College of Art, has for years advocated the total elimination of Caucasians.

During his final lecture before retirement last Monday, he told his white male students “you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease.”

NOEL IGNATIEV: If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world! They only murder, exploit and oppress non-whites! At least a white woman can have sex with a black man and make a brown baby but what can a white male do? He’s good for nothing. Slavery, genocides against aboriginal peoples and massive land confiscation, the inquisition, the holocaust, white males are all to blame! You maintain your white male privilege only by oppressing, discriminating against and enslaving others!

That transcript was published at a website called Diversity Chronicle which agrees with Ignatiev:

The good Professor’s sound and reasonable words resonate with every enlightened and progressive mind. They are indisputable and no one can debate them. They should not be controversial in the slightest, yet remarkably a few far-right extremists object to the Prof. Ignatiev’s advice. The Professor however, reported receiving “a standing ovation” from his “largely white and middle class students.”
 
Old May 12th, 2015 #16
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

PROGRESSIVE PROFESSOR URGES WHITE MALE STUDENTS TO COMMIT SUICIDE DURING CLASS

November 18, 2013 by Diversity Chronicle in Anti-Semitism, Intolerance, Patriarchy, Privileged White Males, Racism, White Privilege 30 Comments
Noel_Ignatiev

By Ivan Fernando

“If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live. You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world! They only murder, exploit and oppress non-whites! At least a white woman can have sex with a black man and make a brown baby but what can a white male do? He’s good for nothing. Slavery, genocides against aboriginal peoples and massive land confiscation, the inquisition, the holocaust, white males are all to blame! You maintain your white male privilege only by oppressing, discriminating against and enslaving others!” Professor Noel Ignatiev, a tenured professor at Massachusetts College loudly proclaimed to his class last Monday, his final teaching day before retirement.

The good Professor’s sound and reasonable words resonate with every enlightened and progressive mind. They are indisputable and no one can debate them. They should not be controversial in the slightest, yet remarkably a few far-right extremists object to Prof. Ignatiev’s advice. The Professor however, reported receiving “a standing ovation” from his “largely white and middle class students.” Prof. Ignatiev’s critics say that openly calling for students, even if they are white males, to kill themselves was inappropriate and perhaps excessive. In this article, we will look at the other side of the issue.

Fortunately, I was able to arrange a telephone interview with the professor. I felt he deserved a chance to tell his side of the story. A side that our radical and racist far-right media refuse to report. The transcript of our dialogue follows below:

Ivan Fernando: I want to thank you for agreeing to this interview. It’s a pleasure to be able to talk to an esteemed academic of your calibre and impressive credentials.

Prof. Ignatiev: Thank you. I am happy to talk with you today.

Ivan Fernando: I understand that a few people objected to your advice to your white male students on your last day of teaching. Why do you think that is?

Prof. Ignatiev: I chalk it all up to white supremacist attitudes. The goal of destroying the white race is simply so desirable, it boggles the mind trying to understand how anyone could possibly object to it. Those who object to my advice, knowingly or perhaps unknowingly, are themselves white supremacists. They wish to go on oppressing and exploiting other races and maintaining their own privileged positions of power. That is the conscious and sometimes subconscious motivation of all of my critics. That is why they object to destroying the cancer of humanity known as the white race. That ugly disease, which dares to call itself a people and a culture.

Ivan Fernando: All whites, or just white males should commit suicide?

Prof. Ignatiev: Obviously, all whites need to be destroyed, but why not start with white males? They are behind most of history’s greatest atrocities. Besides, some of the brothers like to bang white women. Eventually white women can breed out, but my feeling is that if you are a white male, you should kill yourself now. If you are a thoughtful person, with a social consciousness who considers himself white, you will consider suicide. It’s the right thing to do. Let me read you an e-mail that I received today from a xenophobic white-supremacist.

“I’m not a racist, in fact I am an avowed anti-racist, I just think calling for all white males to kill themselves is extreme. When you say that every white person is bad or advocate violence against them, it sounds almost as though you are becoming a kind of racist yourself. You say it is good for everyone to be proud of their culture. Blacks, Mexicans and everyone else. Why should whites be the only exception? For the sake of argument, supposing whites have wronged many other races historically. Should we punish people today for their ancestor’s sins? Today minorities have affirmative action and generous social welfare programs to protect them. Can we really say that most whites are racist now or that the government is? Should Blacks who descend from Blacks who owned or sold slaves feel guilty and be punished for ancestral wrongs?”

Ivan Fernando: Wow. (laughter)

Prof. Ignatiev: I know, mind boggling. What an absurd and irrational line of reasoning. They just throw logic out the window entirely. It’s impossible to dialogue with these people. Notice the blind and irrational hatred behind every word! No one has committed violence, genocide and dispossession on the level of white males. The whole purpose of white male culture is to perpetuate their privileged status and continue their oppression of non-whites. Whites don’t have a culture like other races in which traditions and customs are preserved as an expression of a common identity. White culture is an entirely economic and social culture which is about shutting out other people deemed “non-white” as a means of preventing their social and economic advancement! In other words all of ‘white culture’ so-called, stems from hatred of the other, unlike other ethnicities which do have cultures. White people are a disease, they are parasites! They don’t deserve to live!

Ivan Fernando: Yes, Absolutely, could you give us some examples though for our readers, regarding the racist nature of white culture.

Prof. Ignatiev: Columbus Day, whites literally celebrate the genocide of non-whites, delighting in it. Thanksgiving Day. Whites honour the Pilgrims who gave Native Americans blankets deliberately infected with small pox to kill their babies. Yeah, it is about being thankful, thankful that whites butchered most Native Americans so they could steal their land and establish a racist society based on white male privilege! Christmas is also racist. Should I go on?

Ivan Fernando: Please do.

Prof. Ignatiev: The idea of celebrating the birth of a middle eastern Semite, yet portraying him as a Nordic white person in visual art is not only racist, but obscene and Anti-Semitic! Of course there is Santa Claus as well. Who is he? A bearded old white man! He lives at the North Pole, it doesn’t get whiter than that! Who works for Santa? Of course elves, diminutive, perhaps slightly brown people, with pointed ears who have been enslaved by a privileged white male. Christmas and white culture disgust me. I hate this time of year so much. I hate going outside and seeing Christmas trees or Christmas lights. They should be banned! A Christmas tree is just one notch above a burning cross in my opinion!

Ivan Fernando: What do you suggest that people do for the holidays. Especially, minority families who may feel pressured to celebrate Christmas, or other European racist holidays? Is there an alternative?

Prof Ignatiev: A great Black Professor in the 60’s came up with Kwanza, a way to celebrate African heritage. Hopefully a Mexican-American equivalent will soon be developed as another Christmas alternative.

Ivan Fernando: I am sorry, but we are starting to run low on time. Let me ask you, have you suffered any attacks personally, or received any threats for your advice to your students during your final class?

Prof. Ignatiev: (laughter) No. I haven’t. In fact all the responses I have received, except for a few e-mails have been positive. I feel vindicated. Perhaps we are finally coming to an awareness in this country that the cancer known as the white race must be obliterated. Especially in the form of white males. Obama is president, and I think there is an excellent chance that we will never have a white male president again. I think we are witnessing the breaking of the back of the white male power structure. We will still have residual white males that must be dealt with, but I am confident that we’ve won. Eventually, I would like to put white males in concentration camps and work them to death just like they’ve done to everyone else. When they are all dead we can throw a party and dance around their corpses!

Ivan Fernando: I certainly hope so. I hope you are right. If so it is the dawning of a new era of peace and progress. I apologize Professor, but we are out of time now. Thank you again, and it was a pleasure speaking with you.

Prof Ignatiev. The pleasure was mine. Thank you Ivan. I love Diversity Chronicle by the way, I recommended it to all my students. Keep up the good work!

Ivan Fernando: You are very kind Prof. Ignatiev. Thank you again and Good night.

Prof. Ignatiev: Good Night.

https://diversitychronicle.wordpress...-during-class/
 
Old May 12th, 2015 #17
Jarl i torpet
Junior Member
 
Jarl i torpet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Jarl i torpet
Default

Something that's kind of funny is that if you visit his wikipedia page and look under the category Controversies it says he's gotten in trouble for being anti Semitic against a toaster and calling Israel racist. The fact that those things caused him problems but his advocacy for abolishing the White race didn't is another piece of evidence that the title of this thread is correct.
__________________
Kill with kindness, not a gun.
 
Old May 19th, 2015 #18
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Uni diversity officer could lose job after tweeting with hashtag 'kill all white men' http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-10259801.html … multicultural "enrichment"?
 
Old May 22nd, 2015 #19
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,356
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default


Rod Liddle wants to know why a diversity officer who uses #killallwhitemen still has her job http://sunpl.us/6012CbMo
 
Old August 20th, 2016 #20
Jack Robertson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10
Jack Robertson
Default project high tech

I tried to sign up with a program that would train young people for different sorts of jobs in electronics and computer programing but they never even gave me an answer. I found out later that it was minorities only and what's more had a hundred percent failure rate. So that was some jerks idea of how to use tax payer's money. Correct the "racism" inherent in high tech fields. Because of course this "racism" is the only reason why minorities are underepresented certainly not anything to do with their limited intellect. Everybody knows that minorities are have superior brains, just watch any movie, any time some poor white fool can't figure something out a minority comes along to help him out.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.
Page generated in 0.16045 seconds.