UPDATE: “Threat that closed Los Angeles schools Tuesday now being investigated as hoax”
Newsflash: The people who run the LAUSD are idiots.
LOS ANGELES — The Los Angeles public schools were abruptly shut down and students sent home on Tuesday after the police received what officials described as a credible bomb threat against the nation’s second-largest school system, throwing into disarray the lives of millions of Angelenos — students, parents, teachers and other school staff members.
The threat was made electronically, and it was explicitly “to students at schools,” said Ramon C. Cortines, superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District. He said “some of the details talked about backpacks and other packages.”
That gray Japanese robot from outer space on the right preparing to burn down with its flamethrower the beige Los Angeles Cathedral has recently been named The Ramon C. Cortines School of the Visual and Performing Arts. Due to its shape and location right on the 101 Freeway in downtown, the $242 million Ramon C. Cortines School is the most visible public high school in L.A., even more than the $578 million Robert F. Kennedy Schools on Wilshire Blvd.
Which makes the following from the L.A. Daily Newseven funnier (the details keep piling up as the excerpt goes on):
Los Angeles Unified [School District] will pay $200,000 and give lifetime health benefits to settle a sexual-harassment allegation filed by a facilities executive against retired Superintendent Ramon Cortines, officials said Wednesday.
Scot Graham, who has worked in the Facilities Division for 12 years and is now director of leasing and asset management, claims that Cortines made unwanted sexual advances during a weekend spent at the superintendent’s second home in Kern County in July 2010.
Graham’s attorneys notified the district in March – nearly a year after Cortines retired – that he intended to file a sexual-harassment claim.
Hoping to avoid potentially expensive litigation, the school board met three times in executive session before voting 4-3 on Tuesday to approve the deal.
The settlement gives Graham $200,000 cash, plus lifetime health benefits that officials valued at roughly $250,000. In exchange, the 56-year-old Graham agreed to retire from his $150,000-a-year job on May 31.
During a briefing for reporters, officials released a statement from Cortines that outlined his years-long friendship with Graham and how he’d alerted his buddy to a job opening at the district in 2000. He also admitted to a single incident of consensual sex in 2010, but denied that his advances were inappropriate.
“As the district’s former top staff member, I regret allowing myself to engage in such spontaneous, consensual behavior,” said Cortines, 79, who has never beeen married. “However, Mr. Graham had never indicated to me that our interaction was unwelcome.”
Is this $450k coming out of retired Superintendent Cortines’s pension? If not, what evidence is there that this isn’t one Big Gay Collusive Scam?
However, I think it only fair that Cortines be punished by forcing that absurd high school, with its Water Slide of Doom, to continue to bear his name.
Cortines was chancellor of New York City schools in the 1990s. Mayor Rudy Giuliani pressured him into quitting by telling him to not “be so precious.” So, now we know what Rudy was hinting at.
Posted inLos Angeles|Comments Off on NYT: Los Angeles Schools Closed After Bomb Threat
Controllers can’t prove operators sabotage trains for personal retribution, but the trainees say the practice is well known. ROCC veterans kept track of repeat “train breakers,” Watkins says, and trainees were warned about one driver who “was almost guaranteed to break her train if she didn’t like the way you talked to her.” A Metro spokeswoman says, “We have no reason to believe this is a widespread or systemic issue.”
The trainees were equally disturbed by the poor safety practices they witnessed. The ROCC was noisy and chaotic; controllers yelled across the room and were distracted by their cell phones. Radio communication with trains was often impossible because dead spots exist throughout the system. Alarms sounded constantly, triggered by everything from power surges to water in tunnels—although many were false warnings. “It’s well over a thousand alarms a day,” Watkins says. “But they ignore pretty much all of them.”
How was this dysfunction tolerated? Leverage. Because controllers—the most critical employees—were in such short supply, they were allowed to follow their own rules. “The ROCC is like God at WMATA,” Scarbrough says. “They operate kind of autonomously from the rest of the company.”
It’s a self-reinforcing problem. Metro hasn’t been able to improve the ROCC culture because it’s so beholden to the current personnel—yet the current personnel are a big part of the staff shortage. Despite a concerted effort to recruit and train new hires, Metro added just three controllers between 2011 and 2015, the FTA says.
Comments:
* It’s sad to see metro suffer like this. I’ve been riding metro since ’91. It was a gem then. Something to be proud of as the article notes. Now I wish I could only look at it as a joke. It’s downright dangerous. The bottom-line is that it’s not a professional organization. It’s rife with political cronyism. It’s been sued repeated for discrimination. For instance, hispanics dominate entry-level jobs in the DC metro area. In 2012, only one laborer out of 67 is hispanic. 97% of the bus and metro operators are black. Their civil rights division has 17 employees, all of whom are black. The average starting salary — in 2012 — was over $60,000, well above the average for the DC area. The culture is insular and unaccountable. 75% of operating expenses goes to salaries? I support dedicated revenue streams for metro, but only until there is real governance, meaningful employee-culture reforms, as well as increased employee diversity. Think the Washingtonian has that backwards (with the 75% number coming at the end of the article, almost as a coda). If you don’t have knowledge of the appropriate policy and procedures for your job, you’re out. If you are intentionally pulling your train out of service, you’re out. It’s time to put the taxpayer and customer first. Not to mention their safety.
* The American public and lawmakers, whether consciously or not, tend to view public transit as “welfare transportation.” This means that people believe public transit: a) is primarily for use by those of lower income groups and students, b) that it should be priced as inexpensively as possible to put the least possible cost burden on riders, and c) that it should be operated and subsidized by the government.
These views tend to lead to very minimal public transit systems built to provide the minimal justifiable levels of service and service quality, which then attract low ridership and fare box revenues that little chance of covering operating and maintenance (O&M) costs. Transit agencies are then forced to grovel to municipal and state governments to find sufficient monies year in and year out to cover those O&M costs and more often than not, the money they are able to procure make even keeping up with maintenance difficult to do, never mind expanding or improving service.
When you throw in the added challenges of having to deal with the bureaucracies of public agencies and the challenges of unionized workers, it can be extremely challenging to have efficient public transit systems in the US.
But public transit doesn’t have to be this way. In many countries, public transit is viewed not as “welfare transportation,” but as the primary form of travel in urban areas and the most important piece of infrastructure. It is also viewed as a business that can and should operate profitably.
Cities should look at Tokyo for how to do public transit the right way. The Tokyo subway system has two primary operators (Tokyo Metro, and Toei Subway) providing service to 13 lines and 290 stations and has nearly 9 million riders daily. The stations are clean and well-lit, the trains are always on-time, and the ridership revenue covers 180% of annual operating and maintenance costs.
Ninety-seven percent of the bus and train operators at the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority are black, with only six white women out of more than 3,000 drivers, according to Metro documents — a lack of diversity at one of the region’s largest employers that has led to an acknowledgment of failure in affirmative-action documents and spawned a series of lawsuits.
The homogeneity, interviews with dozens of current and former Metro workers indicated, is a proxy to a clubby culture of favoritism in which merit has little to do with promotions, and accountability, such as noting safety violations, is a career death knell. In typical examples, court and Metro records show, a black man who spent eight years in prison for dealing PCP was promoted to a high-level management position soon after his release, and whites in the same positions as blacks with far less seniority are inexplicably paid less.
With Metro’s budget chronically strained and reports of mismanagement coming more regularly than trains, interviews and internal records depict a likely root: an environment in which hardworking employees are actively excluded and those who rise are those willing to do the bare minimum — never causing a stir by flagging rampant safety violations, reporting malfeasance or proposing improvements.
“When the accident happened in 2009, I called a supervisor and said, ‘Is this the one we all dreaded?’ The way workers do their jobs, we all knew it was a matter of time. … The inept get promoted, and the capable get buried. Smart people were put in the corner, ostracized and given nothing to do,” said Christine Townsend, who sued Metro for discrimination and won.
It is a culture in which a white male engineer near completion of a Ph.D. was passed over for a management position in favor of a black man who was barely literate, multiple staffers said.
“The average rider wouldn’t believe the things that go on. There are so many easy things we could do to make the system better,” a station manager said. “But they’d never put me in charge because they know I’d make sure others actually did their jobs. They don’t want change. It’s go along to get along.”
Metro is a quasi-public agency that receives funding from the federal government, Maryland, Virginia and local jurisdictions to operate a regional bus and rail transportation system in the national capital area, but is not beholden to rules that apply to fully governmental entities. With a $2.5 billion operating and capital budget for fiscal 2012, Metrorail serves 86 stations and has 106 miles of track, while Metrobus serves the nation’s capital with 1,500 buses.
Metro’s affirmative-action plan notes that the 1.4 percent of its bus and train operators who are Hispanic and the 25 percent who are female of any race are “less than reasonably expected.” It does not make note of the 1.5 percent who are white.
Even in entry-level occupations typically dominated by Hispanics, there are virtually none at Metro. Only one laborer out of 67 is Hispanic; of 540 landscapers, carpenters and cleaners, only 22 are Hispanic. In the national capital region, Hispanics make up 13 percent of adults and blacks comprise 25 percent; white women constitute 29 percent.
“The odds of such a disparity occurring by chance are statistically infinitesimal,” Ronald A. Schmidt, a lawyer representing 12 white women exploring a class-action lawsuit, wrote in a 2003 letter. “There appears to be an entrenched network of African-American employees at WMATA that is able to steer jobs, promotion, training and other career enhancing benefit to persons of their own racial or ethnic group.”
The average Metro worker had a $60,000 salary, which rises to $69,000 including overtime. That is more than 71 percent of area residents who had an income in 2010, including 62 percent of whites, census records show.
No recourse
White and Hispanic employees who allege discrimination have found a deaf ear at Metro’s civil rights office, whose 17 employees are black. Until at least 1999, that office tracked complaints via a handwritten ledger on a series of taped-together sheets of paper, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times. The system “made determining statistics impossible,” said a civil rights employee from the time.
In recent months, such antiquated record keeping has allowed employees to steal thousands of dollars that electronic systems easily could have detected — and in more than one case, a culture of complicity has kept prosecutors from trying those who were caught because they feared no clean witness or proper records could be found.
“There’s a strong sense of nepotism, and it is the culture of Metro,” the civil rights employee said. “It was more of a buddy system than it was merit-based.”
…Of a dozen senior supervisors overseeing the rail division in 2007, 10 were black and two were white, and five black supervisors, all with less than a year of tenure in the position, were paid more than both whites, who had more seniority — one with 20 years — personnel records obtained by The Times show.
The group making more money includes senior supervisors such as Orlando Terrell King, who has been charged with reckless endangerment and fraudulently attempting to obtain a driver’s license, according to Maryland state records. Mr. King, who is paid $62,536, was promoted by Metro to oversee those who drive trains carrying thousands of passengers daily.
Also rising rapidly to senior supervisor was Robbie O. McGee, who spent eight years in federal prison for felony distribution of PCP while on probation for another crime. He received five pay increases at Metro in two years.
…The personnel record of the white male senior supervisor, Robert Fish, meanwhile, indicates strict standards and scrutiny, including suspensions and severe reprimands for minor infractions such as possession of a covered cup of coffee.
Ms. Townsend had a college degree and a decade of experience as a schoolteacher when she was passed over for a training job in favor of a man who had taken some community college courses and, it turned out, could barely write a sentence.
…It is not just that mediocrity is overlooked. Dozens of employees whom Metro rules forbid from speaking to the media said: Diligence is discouraged, because anywhere one looked was something that needed to be fixed — and change, especially when it involved work, was anathema to senior Metro line workers.
For example, Ms. Townsend said, by 2004, many trains were operating without radios in defiance of federal rules. Other drivers confirmed that was common knowledge. So she authored a study and included a recommendation that Metro start substituting cellphones.
“I was read the riot act: ‘You had no right to compile these statistics,’ even though it was my job. They didn’t want people showing problems,” she said.
…Days after a Red Line accident killed nine in July 2009, Brenda Whorton drew the line.
“I told them I wasn’t going to pencil-whip for them,” she said, referring to a technique so common in Metro culture that there is a term for it. “It means fudging it: like marking down that a motor’s according to specs when it’s not.” It is common for midnight-shift workers to “lock the doors and go to sleep, because they’ve got other jobs,” and equally common for supervisors to turn a blind eye, she said, leading to pencil-whipping of the inspections they’re supposed to be doing — and delays for morning riders.
“Anyone who blew the whistle or caused any trouble, when pick time came — every six months you pick shifts — you’d be moved. They spend more time trying to manipulate this stuff than they do doing their job.”
Dozens said white workers, especially women, were openly subject to racist and sexist remarks without repercussion — behavior that drove many targets to seek transfers or leave the agency. All said they have been inexplicably passed over hundreds of times for promotions to positions such as station manager while others with less seniority passed them by.
“I was the only white woman in car maintenance out of 338, and they made my life miserable,” Ms. Whorton said, adding that colleagues once electrified a track circuit on which she was working and laughed. “Nothing happened to them.”
No one knows what the two white women were doing on that Metro in that part of Washington, D.C.
They “did not want any trouble,” they said on the video. To the black mob that confronted them, threatened them, beat them and robbed them, it was no trouble at all.
So they grabbed their iPhones, but not before the girls fought back to retrieve them. Unsuccessfully.
All the while one of the members of the crew was rolling video.
Members of this mob call themselves the 44th Street Crew in Southeast Washington. For those not familiar with the different sections of Washington, that is not the lobbyist/media/functionary dinner-party part of town.
Reporters at the Fox affiliate in Washington seemed surprised at the mob violence. But to people who ride the Metro, it was just another day.
Metro police have seen so much of it they are ready with instructions for riders who encounter it: Resistance is futile:
“There’s nothing worth fighting over and getting assaulted for,” said Deputy Chief Ron Pavlik of the two women defending themselves. “There are lot better ways to fight back.”
Some people devote entire newsletters to the lawless Metro, where black mob violence is often seen, but seldom reported. According to UnsuckDCMetro, here’s a “Harrowing Account of Yet More Metro Violence” that never made the Washington Post:
I have never been more disgusted or shocked by what I witnessed Saturday night at the Anacostia Metro. I went to pick up a family member at the Metro, and just as she was telling me about the fights (Yes, plural!) that happened on the Green Line train [between L’Enfant and Anacostia], we witnessed a group of 6 to 8 young black teenagers kick, stomp, punch and push a lone teenage girl.
I could not believe my eyes! I also could not believe there was not an officer in sight.
When the family member arrived, she had her own story as well:
When she got on the train toward Anacostia, a group of teenagers proceeded to verbally and physically assault a group of young women. One of the boys threw a bottle and another threw the contents of a bottle in one of the woman’s face. The assaults got so out of hand that some people landed on a woman and her baby.
The attacking group had the doors to the train blocked so people couldn’t get off the train. My cousin told me she was so scared that she hid behind some seats and pulled out the box cutter she used for work.
Every story like this prompts readers to tell their own stories, in this case, dozens of them. This is typical:
I was leaving a friend’s place around 11 p.m. on a Saturday a few weeks ago and groups of teenagers were harassing everyone at the top of the escalator on the north-bound side of Eisenhower station. I could see it getting bad fairly quickly and was lucky to catch a train after only about 2 mins of being on the platform.
Over at DCist.com, they are also not in any danger of running out of material from the Metro violence beat. Whether it is a “huge fight” of 100 black people, or violence on a more modest scale, they got the goods.
“Stunning is the sheer number of participants in this fight,” said DCist. The site does not report the race of the participants.
TBD.com also reports on the Metro. The big story last year featured Allen Heywood. A black mob attacked Heywood as he was reading a book waiting for a train. As they beat and taunted him, Heywood begged for mercy:
Haywood repeatedly asked the girl why she was attacking him, pleading with her to end it. “Stop it! Stop it! G—— it! You stop this s— right now! I did nothing to you!”
That got a good laugh from other members of the mob, who “egged her on.” They left him dazed and bleeding and so upset that no one helped him that he stood outside the station holding a sign:
“I WAS ATTACKED AT L’ENFANT METRO SUNDAY AT 7:15 PM. NO ONE HELPED. PLEASE BE CAREFUL.”
One spectator who took the above video offered the video to Heywood to use as evidence against his attackers. But only if he paid for it.
Horrified passengers witnessed brutal July 4 slaying aboard Metro car
Jasper Spires boarded the Red Line Metro train at Rhode Island Avenue shortly before 1 p.m. Saturday, joining passengers from the District and elsewhere headed to various Fourth of July festivities, among them the Foo Fighters concert at RFK Stadium.
As the train rumbled toward its next stop, at NoMa-Gallaudet, a three-minute ride, D.C. police said, the 18-year-old Spires — who may have been high on synthetic drugs — tried to grab a cellphone tucked into the waistband of a recent American University graduate headed to a gathering with friends.
The two struggled, police said, and the terror began.
Police and a witness interviewed said passengers trapped in the moving train huddled at both ends of the car and watched in horror as Spires punched 24-year-old Kevin Joseph Sutherland until he fell to the floor, then stabbed him until he was dead. Court documents say the victim was cut or stabbed 30 or 40 times, in the chest, abdomen, back, side and arms. Police said the assailant then threw the victim’s cellphone and returned to stomp on Sutherland’s body.
“We were in a moving train,” said a 52-year-old woman, who spoke on the condition that she not be named because she is both a victim and a witness to a crime. “You’re not really sure what you need to do. . . . This man is holding a bloody knife. I don’t think anyone was going to try and stop him.”
Posted inBlacks, Crime|Comments Off on How Washington’s Metro Got So Bad
Over the past week, Americans experienced a breathtaking barrage from top politicians and news commentators about “who we are” or “what we as a country stand for.” Using the phrase identifies the speaker as one of the virtuous “we” who shuns Donald Trump and rejects his recommendation, post San Bernardino terror attacks, that Muslim immigration to the United States be halted until the government can “figure out what is going on.”
The breadth and scope of reaction against Trump’s comment was stunning. Politicians from House speaker Paul Ryan to Hillary Clinton, the major neoconservative columnists at the country’s largest papers, along with every liberal or left wing opinion outlet one could imagine, rushed to express contempt for Trump and his suggestion. What passes for the foreign policy establishment chimed in too. General Wesley Clark labeled Trump’s remarks “un-American”. David Cameron to Benjamin Netanyahu added their own denunciations. An ACLU official recommended that Trump supporters be shot. For several days, America experienced the kind of bipartisan power elite unanimity which one thought could happen only in the wake of national tragedy.
Much of the reaction was somewhat Islamophilic: America needed larger numbers of Muslim immigrants to help win hearts and minds versus ISIS. An immigration pause would alienate them. As evidence, the Times highlighted a story of Trump luxury brand items being removed from the shelves in rich Arab Gulf states.
But no one has yet measured how the prospect of an immigrant visa, or lack of it, weighs compared to other policies through which the United States makes an impression on the Muslim world. For instance, one way in which the U.S states “who we are” to Arab and Muslim audiences is by killing a lot of Muslims. Several years ago Harvard Professor Stephen Walt came up with an estimate of how many Muslims have been killed by the United States in the past 30 years, estimating conservatively that it was slightly less than 300,000.
Posted inDonald Trump|Comments Off on Trump and the Riot of the Elites
* Instead of letting Trump’s message play-out in the spirit of “Let the best platform win” the establishment signals that they’re eager to coerce Trump to abandon his message and while this may yield a short-term benefit for them of silencing the messenger, the positions Trump advances are held by a significant portion of society and when people are silenced and not permitted to have their grievances addressed in the political system, that’s when guillotines in the public square make a come-back and elites’ heads are used as basketballs. Does this dynamic escape the attention of the elites?
* “A striking thing about Donald Trump’s campaign is that The Establishment’s hostility to him proposing immigration restrictions is costing him serious money, but unlike so many others, he has yet to flinch.”
These costs have galvanized Trump into a much more serious candidate than he would otherwise be.
My guess is he may have been half-hearted “vanity” candidate when this all began, but there is no turning back now, not with all that he has lost.
* Whether the Trump campaign folds early, wins or loses, the two great things are:
1. Destroying Jeb Bush. Even if Bush becomes the nominee in some fluke, he is mortally wounded by Trump.
2. Proving in the midst of the migrant debate that the Western elite are open borders uber alles. They will turn the 1st world into a techno-cream top for them with Brazil bottom just to maintain their current economic dominance and luxurious living.
Forget the politicians, this is about the true power of the economic elite in our FIRE based economy. FIRE sectors need transactions. Need new marks for their scams. Tech gets in on it with the H1B visa crew and the ability to suck new customers into the Western consumer machine to buy their gadgets and maintain sales growth.
* We are in uncharted and unbalanced economic waters. Combine a severe recession with diversity, lots of guns, and overwhelmingly white general staff and combat arms and air force (i.e., “doesn’t look like America”) and things can get nasty real quick and in unexpected ways.
I happen to know a lot of Syrian Christians. Strange as it may seem, they are in shock that their country blew up 70 years after independence. Never saw it coming, and they had to leave houses, businesses, places their family had been for generations, and get on the next flight out.
* This is a warning shot to Trump supporters: “If you support Trump, we in the media will actively promote people to destroy your livelihood. We will justify it because these people will not be the government, and therefore the First Amendment won’t apply. And we won’t investigate charges that a government-agency or a a big time lefty donor like Soros is out to destroy you.”
If there ever was a time to start your own business and thus protect most of your free speech rights by not being a company man, now is that time.
A man with income independence and no debt is dangerous to the powers that be. Remember that.
* Someone refresh my memory. Have the Brits ever had problems with Muslim immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers?
There are several YouTube videos and documentaries. See Dispatches Britain’s Hidden Child Abuse, The Hunt For Britain’s Sex Gangs (4 parts) and Sexual Grooming Gangs in the British Pakistani Community.
This happened in several cities.
Google and read these Wikipedia articles:
1: Oxford Sex Gang – 7 Muslim men, five Pakistani and two Eritrean. Girls ranged from 11 to 15 years old.
2: Rochdale Sex Trafficking Gang – 12 Muslim men charged. Eight were British Pakistani. One was an Afghan asylum seeker. 47 girls were involved. All girls are white.
3: Derby Sex Gang – 13 Muslim men. 9 convicted. Up to 100 girls, ages 12-18
4: Telford Sex Gang – 7 Muslim men convicted
5: Rotherham Sex Grooming – In 2010, five men of Pakistani heritage were found guilty of a series of sexual offences against girls as young as twelve.
* Consider the story of the South Africa: When white cities and communities were pressured to grant full membership and full privileges to blacks, they wanted the blacks to assimilate and speak their Afrikaans language. The blacks rioted and fought back. Mandela famously called the Afrikaans language, the “language of the oppressor”. South Africa currently has museums demonizing the white Afrikaans who pressured incoming blacks to assimilate and speak their language as racist villains. Today, even historic Afrikaans schools are being forced to reduce usage of Afrikaans to cater to students who aren’t interested in Afrikaans culture or identity. Why should the German language and heritage be spared a different fate? What makes the German language superior to Arabic or spares it from being demonized as another “language of the oppressor”?
* Assuming she’s [Merkel] not just saying it for political reasons to protect her right flank, when she talks about multiculturalism she probably means the theory that people of different cultures can live side by side and not only does it not cause problems, it is actually superior to the old monoculture, because it is enriching, vibrant and exciting. This was mainly pushed by the European leftists in the 90s and it stemmed from their demented cultural relativism holding that we have no right to force our culture on them because our culture is not better than theirs.
So when mainstream rightwing European politicians like Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron criticize multiculturalism they are not saying that nonwhite immigration was a mistake and that it should be stopped, they are just saying that immigrants need to and should be expected to adopt the main principles of our culture and integrate and that the government needs to help them achieve it.
Posted inDonald Trump|Comments Off on The Return Of The Guillotines
Whiteness was designed to exclude, and to simultaneously offer those of us classified as white certain comforts, privileges, as well as political, economic, and cultural supremacy. Because of this, whiteness harms those it excludes and classifies as others. Importantly, it does so on our behalf.
Owning up to and acknowledging the inherited benefits of whiteness, and encouraging other white people to do so as well, is an integral aspect of working toward racial justice in white spaces.
Yet, when confronted with the depth of sins whiteness has and continues to commit to the benefit of all white people, many of us–even those who claim they share in the desire to work toward racial justice–are scared away.
And so, often, white people working toward racial justice do so with an eye toward creating a new version of whiteness, rather than dealing with whiteness as it exists. Now let’s be clear, working toward a healthier version of whiteness is an important normative ideal. But not when it comes at the expense of dealing with the unjust, and immoral system of white supremacy as it exists, in favor of focusing on idealistic versions of whiteness designed to make us individually feel better. Put differently, we need philosophers, scholars, engaged citizens, and thoughtful actors imagining the world as it could be–but when the subject at hand is literally a matter of survival for black people and/or People of Color, it’s our belief that the focus of white anti-racists should tilt heavily toward honestly dealing with the injustices in front of us.
Posted inWhites|Comments Off on Jesse Benn: Towards a Concept of White Wounding
They come to him — students, co-workers and congregants alike, sometimes in tears — with their questions: What should we do, Imam Zaid? What should we do about the suspicion, about the hatred, about the second glances and the threat of confrontations on the street?
What should we do about Donald Trump and his rhetorical attacks on Muslim immigrants? And how do we process the deadly attacks by people who invoked our religion? Should we return to our ancestral home countries, hunker down in the shadows?
Zaid Shakir, co-founder and faculty member at the nation’s only Muslim liberal arts college, and a 59-year-old Air Force veteran widely regarded to be one of America’s most influential Islamic thought leaders, has his answers ready.
He tells those who have come seeking his counsel in a hard time that, for now anyway, there’s not much they could, or should, do but be themselves. Live their lives just as they did the day before San Bernardino, or Paris, or the Twin Towers.
Posted inBlacks, Islam|Comments Off on LAT: For young Muslims, the struggle to belong is ’emotionally draining’
America is funny about writers. When it comes to her homegrown novelists, she ignores them in favor of topical clickbait nattering (sometimes even the novelists’ own nattering). When it comes to European writers, however, we prefer a sample of their thoughts in fictional form over the most sparkling essay.
To wit: most of the Alt-Right and even half of the Left in the States has now heard of Michel Houellebecq, author of the cautionary novel Submission, in which he satirizes a possible ‘soft takeover’ of a ridiculously apathetic France by Islamists. Submission was released January 7, 2015—the day of the Charlie Hebdo shootings—and Houellebecq was caricatured on the cover of that week’s Charlie, which may have helped his cause. Rarely does a novelist have the luck to be so perfectly, if macabrely, newsworthy.
However, Houellebecq is only one-third of the unholy trinity of anti-Leftist intellectuals who’ve made it their duty to disturb the French bobo-gentsia. His essay-writing brethren—Alain Finkielkraut and Éric Zemmour—get short shrift this side of the pond. Zemmour’s 2014 bestseller, Le Suicide Francais, has yet to be translated into English, though it moved 5,000 copies a day for the first two weeks after its release.
As for longtime intello Finkielkraut, precious little of what he has written since he abandoned the Left in disgust has appeared in English; dear me, what a coincidence. A former soixante-huitard (which means ’68’er, which is to say a hippie—or, as I prefer to say, soixante-retard), Finkielkraut slowly turned toward the Right over the years as his comrades grew more ridiculous.
Finally, all hell broke loose when he released last year’s L’Identité malheureuse—a gentle and subtle argument for French identitarianism. Notably, Finkielkraut is the progeniture of an earlier wave of immigration, back when France still expected immigrants to become culturally French. But neither his Jewish-Polish background (off to the races, tinfoil-hat brigade!— a Jew never loves his country, which is why Finkielkraut repeatedly slaps his neck on the media chopping block for her) nor the cautious, reasoned tone of the book slowed the hip young press in their race to fling ideological offal at him. Like their counterparts in the U.S., France’s youthful media establishment proudly fancy themselves rebels when they attack the old and dispossessed.
More a philosopher than a politico—even if, as Le Figaro recently noted, he’s often denigrated as a populist—Finkielkraut usually seems bemused when he’s called a Nazi. But he seems to be getting less patient of late.
Finkielkraut’s new book, La Seule exactitude, was released in France a few weeks before the recent Paris attacks; I only last week received my copy via Kindle in the States, since apparently the ocean Intertubes are slow this time of year. Before the Friday the 13th attacks, the French press, having already forgotten that they’re all Charlie, tore Finkielkraut apart for trying to warn against filling the country with people who hate the natives.
Posted inFrance|Comments Off on Alain Finkielkraut: Another French Cassandra
It is making our society better by creating the demographic basis for taking our culture back from all the homosexuals who now control it. Only Islam can do that.
Remember that gay deviant Robert Mapplethorpe and his arrogant insults against Jesus, whom Islam reveres as a Prophet and beloved of God? In a society with a substantial Muslim population base, such insults become unthinkable. Islam will cleanse and scour the West until it is free from such filth.
Posted inAmerica, Islam|Comments Off on ‘Instead of telling us Trump is Hitler, tell us how mass muslim immigration makes our societies better’
* One of the relatively unheralded stories of 2015 is how the Alt-Right became an independent force with the ability to come up with great memes, like cuckservative and #NRORevolt, and push them into the mainstream.
* The difference between The Democratic Party and The GOP Establishment is that the Dems fully embrace their Far Left Wing voting base like Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. While The Republican Establishment is embarrassed and ashamed of their Far Right Wing base like Donald Trump supporters and The Tea Party.
This is the reason not many Left Wing voters feel betrayed by The Democratic Party. The Dems do a pretty good job of giving their Left Wing voting base what they want. Very few Left Wing voters are going to sit out the 2016 presidential election. If you are the average Left Wing voter, you feel The Democratic Party has done solid by you. During the last 8 years of Democratic rule we have gotten a lot more 3rd world immigration both illegal & legal, legalization of marijuana in several states, legalization of same sex marriage in all 50 states, all big major U.S cities from New York City to Oklahoma City are sanctuary cities for illegals, more affirmative action, more section 8 housing, Obamacare, no Keystone Pipeline, Confederate Flags have been taken down from all government buildings in the South, freedom of speech is pretty much dead on most American college campuses, etc. If you are a Left Wing voter than you must feel like you are on cloud 9 right now. You feel like the stars have aligned. It’s a great time to live in America right now if you are a voter who is politically Left Of Center.
* Catholic (and Jewish) immigration to the USA in the 19th and early 20th centuries pushed USA politics way to the left of where it would have been otherwise.
Without that immigrant wave, Protestant progressives/leftists/socialists native to the USA would have been a very tiny and powerless minority.
Leftism has swept through Catholic countries just as easily as Protestant countries.
Leftists are safely entrenched in power within the Catholic church itself.
* As Vox Day has repeatedly noted, it would behoove the GOP to embrace their extremists, as they are the shock troops. But as we’ve seen repeatedly with all things Trump over the past five months, Cuckservatives would rather fire at their own side than fire at the enemy.
The reigning mindset is that if the Cucks don’t “tone police” right-wing extremists and constantly condemn offensive rhetoric, some liberal might call them the dreaded “r-word”. Thus, they shoot their own shock troops. This clearly isn’t a good strategy for winning a high-stakes, zero sum cultural war for the very soul of Western Civilization, but there are all those lovely beltway cocktail parties to think of.
* The Man in the High Castle. Hey look, it’s like Nazi Madmen.
Funny, but the video looks like life in Israel where some people are more equal than others.
Btw, if Nazism shows us the danger of majoritarian tyranny, what might minoritarian tyranny look like?
Well, let’s look at South Africa where minority ruled over the majority with apartheid.
Well, let’s look at West Bank where the minority rules over the majority with apathowicz.
Well, let’s look at India where the British minority ruled over the majority with imperialism.
Well, let’s look at the USSR where the communist elites made of national minorities(with good number of Jews) ruled over the majority of Russians and destroyed 50,000 churches and wiped out millions or sent them to gulag.
By the way, Nazi tyranny was at its worst when it turned minoritarian.
Nazis ruling over Germans in Germany was simply a case of German elites ruling over the German majority. Nazis in Germany didn’t kill many, and many Germans were okay. Nazi majoritarianism in Germany did limited harm.
It was when Nazis invaded other countries and imposed minoritarian rule over them that the real horror began. Ask the Poles, ask the Russians, ask the Jews. Nazi minority imperialists ruthlessly oppressed and killed millions.
So, minoritarian tyranny is worse.
And the reason why US is turning into a hellhole is it is now ruled by a minoritarian elite that is utterly corrupt and unaccountable. This minoritarian elite pushed policies that led to millions of deaths in the Middle East and displacement of millions more.
This minoritarian elite has opened the gates of EU and US to countless foreigners who are totally changing the racial and cultural landscape of the West.
Japanese majoritarian rule over Japan was never the problem. Japanese only became problematic when they imposed minoritarian rule over other nations like China, Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, and etc.
* What are some of the problems of traditionalism? It stifles energies, individualities, eccentricities, and regeneration.
Sometimes, a forest fire does a lot of good. By burning away lot of dead wood and old trees, it provides ash as nutrient for new seeds to sprout from the earth into new saplings that grow into big trees. And since sunlight is freely available everywhere, new plants have a chance to grow.
The problem with old forests is that the existing dominant trees hog the sunlight. Everything below must dwell in the shade, and they get little sunlight So, new plants often wither and die without growing bigger while the old trees just grow older.
Traditionalist power is like that. Why did the Egyptians stop changing and progressing? The established powers hogged everything, and everyone else just had to follow. Why did the Chinese empire fail to make progress? The tall trees commanded the sky and absorbed all the sunlight. And even the communist revolution soon became old and tired because the new giant trees of power overshadowed everything else.
Progress means innovation and invention, and that means better ships, arms, ideas, instruments, technologies. That means power.
But ultimately, what should progress serve? Some say progress should serve progress itself, but constant flux is too unstable for commitment and passion. Ultimately, progress must serve a race, culture, land, and history.
And Jews gained great power cuz they found a way to fuse identity and innovation. Jews preserved their identity and passed it down through the generations. But they were also open to new ideas from all around. In a way, they were compelled to be innovative since they had no homeland of their own. As they had to rub shoulders with different peoples, they came in contact with all sorts of ideas and ways.
Anglo civilization came upon a balance of tradition and individuality.
Unlike the Spanish and Russian elites who insisted only on tradition and kept most people ignorant and submissive,
the Anglo Order not only kept with grand traditions and hierarchy but also created legal leeway and rights by which individuals with talent could prove himself, rise in the world, and contribute something fresh to society while also serving his own personal interest.
UK had tall trees hogging much of the sunlight, but there were also clearings in the forest that allowed some degree of sunlight to reach to ground as well. So, new trees could grow as well. And this led to the rise of the bourgeoisie that was fired up with enterprising spirit and innovative will.
What goes for economics also goes for culture. An overly conservative order that insists on a certain official expression as the only correct one will stifle cultural experimentation, development, and progress. This is why communist culture stopped developing. The cult of officialdom just made thing boring and dull.
And this is why Christian art and Classicism eventually became boring and lifeless. It repeated the established styles over and over and over. Romanticism did much to burn away the cultural deadwood and old trees and clear the way for new voices and visions.
And earlier, the explosion of innovation and experimentation of the Renaissance was possible only because the Ancient World had been lost and destroyed. Since so much of it was gone in actuality, it could only be ‘rebirthed’ through vision, imagination, dream, and fantasy. So, the Renaissance was far more than reconstruction of the past. It was a re-envisioning of it.
It’s like what Burt Reynolds character says in DELIVERANCE. “Sometimes you gotta lose yourself before you can find anything.”
* A man can a lot of things, but he cannot live forever. He must have children and let them take his place with new ideas, new visions, and new challenges. A man who thinks he can and should live forever is a fool. Even if we could live forever, we will lose vitality and sense of wonderment as we grow older and older and older. It requires new people to see things with fresh eyes and senses. Change and regeneration are absolutely necessary.
But there also needs to be a sense of continuity, and this comes from a sense of the flow of identity. Things change and new generations find new ideas, experiences, and images, but they are nevertheless connected by a thread of biology and history. Without such link and without such a sense of historical thread, one’s life has no higher or deeper meaning. If a Jew or Chinese were to only see himself an individual, his achievement would serve no higher purpose. He could say he achieved something for ALL humanity, and it’s true enough that the great achievement of any individual can be appreciated by anyone around the world. You don’t have to be German to appreciate Beethoven or have to Japanese to appreciate Kurosawa.
But the idea of ‘humanity’ is too bland, too generic, and too vague. Even as one can inspire all of humanity, one’s life gains truer meaning by being part of a race, culture, and history. It’s like a particular ethnic restaurant is more special than a world buffet that is just a mediocre sampler of various dishes. For an artist to be really good at something, he must be steeped in its culture and history. It’s like Andrei Tarkovsky’s ANDREI RUBLEV is such a powerful film because Tarkovsky was so steeped in Russian history, art, and spirituality. Had he decided to make something that represents ALL HUMANITY, it would have lacked the richness of ANDREI RUBLEV.
And THE GODFATHER is great because Coppola, being Italian-American, knew something of the culture of the Italian community.
A Jew is more meaningful as a Jew than merely as a member of ‘brotherhood of man’. A black African finds more meaning as an African than as a ‘citizen of the world’. Also, the notion of ‘citizen of the world’ is arrogant and megalomaniacal, indeed as if one’s narrow existence and experiences somehow reflect all the people around the world. I mean what does Obama know about Peru, Vietnam, Madagascar, Bolivia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Japan, Germany, Holland, Hungary, and etc. to be a part of their nations too? No, Obama is a mixed race child of a black African and a white mudshark who spent his childhood in Indonesia and Hawaii before going to Ivy colleges. He doesn’t know about most people and most cultures around the world. His narrow experience doesn’t constitute ‘citizenship around the world’. I mean how many languages does he know? How many histories of other peoples does he know?
For him to conflate his narrow experience with the entire world is arrogant than humble though he plays at faux humility.
A truly humble person admits that the world is much bigger than one nation and especially one person. A person who claims to be ‘citizen of the world’ is laying claim to the world as if the world should submit to one’s idea of what is right for everyone in every corner of the world… yeah, such as ‘gay marriage’.
We need traditionalism but there has to be break in the branches and foliage above to allow sunlight to reach the ground as well and make it possible for new seeds to grow into new trees.
But globalism is worse than traditionalism. It is a constant uprooting and overturning of the soil itself so that the native seeds are destroyed while the seeds of all kinds of invasive species are scattered all around so that they will gain dominance over the native species of trees, plants, and flowers.
It doesn’t merely burn and clear away the old and decayed to make way for the new and vital.
The Bubonic Plague, as tragic as it was, cleared the way for new economic activity and cultural movements.
Many Europeans died and many institutions were destroyed, but Europe was still inhabited by Europeans. So, new European activity and enterprise replaced the earlier ones.
But now, Europeans themselves are being replaced by Africans, Arabs, and Asians in Europe itself.
While Europeans refuse to have babies and are dying out, non-Europeans are allowed to arrive in mass and take over European lands. Whatever they do, they won’t be Europeans but foreign invaders who will forever change the genetic and cultural character of Europe. They will do to Europe what Han Chinese are doing to Tibet.
Globalism doesn’t clear the forest for new trees to grow. It is a war on the soil itself that is seeded with invasive species that will forever change the character of the forest.
Still, traditionalism is never enough. A healthy society has to master the magic trick of forgetting and remembering at the same time. One must fuse amnesia with elephant’s memory. If one is crammed with too much memory and received knowledge, it actually has a muffling effect. It’s like there is a time to carry the load. But there is also a time to take off the backpack and roam/run freely. A people who are made to carry the weight of the past all times isn’t allowed to think freely or be creative. All his energy is devoted to carrying the load. (This is part of the problem with the French. They have a great cultural legacy, but its weight has prevented them from breaking out in new directions.) Besides, the true genius is within than something gained from without. Orson Welles was 26 when he made his first film CITIZEN KANE. He had far less experience and knowledge of cinema than many professionals, but he had an intuitive grasp of film language. Those with talent don’t need that much to be creative. Even the personal libraries of the kings and aristocrats were smaller than the library of an average community library in America, but consider the great plays of Shakespeare. And consider the great achievements of the Greeks whose biggest cities had far fewer books and such stuff than any small town in the US.
If greater knowledge = great culture, then someone who read tons of books would be culturally most essential. But some of the greatest artist were far less knowledgeable. Many academic scholars who know so much are incapable of artistic expression or a single original idea. But, many great musicians didn’t even know how to read music. Most artists who changed culture itself were not scholars or academics steeped in knowledge.
And this is true of spirituality as well. Jesus knew something of Jewish tradition, but there were Rabbis who knew much more than he did. Muhammad was barely literate, or the story goes. Yet, those two men changed religious history while most religious clerics and scholars didn’t change anything. Scholarship is about maintaining the tradition, and surely there is a need for such people to keep knowledge of the canon.
But for those who dare to change the world, the key is less about erudition than about inspiration and intuition, and it is the human subconscious, tapped properly of its oil or creative fuel, that is the real storage of the genius of a race. Everyone needs some knowledge, but geniuses can do so much with little whereas most people can’t do anything even with so much. Give a genius 20 great books and a pen and pencil, and he may start cranking out masterpieces. Give a non-genius 1,000 books, but even after reading them all, he may be unable to write anything worth reading. Knowledge is necessary but inspiration is what really counts.
This is why, even if all the artworks in every European museum were to be lost forever, there is still the promise that European genius will create more such great visions and works in the future. While the specific artworks can never be recovered, as long as the genius that created them still exist in the European race, something comparable or even better could be produced in the future. (Likewise, even if all the redwood trees were to be cut down, as long as their seeds are in the ground, new trees will grow. But suppose we allow the trees to remain but remove all the seeds. The trees will last for a long time but eventually die. And when they die, there will never be redwoods again cuz the seeds weren’t there to create new trees.)
So, more important than even the preservation of culture is the preservation of the race. If the culture if preserved but the race is lost, the culture is just a reminder of the past. But if the race goes on living(even with the culture destroyed and lost), it is a guarantee of future genius and future creativity.
Conservatism is about preserving the cultural achievements and moral values of the past, especially of one’s own ancestors.
It is necessary as the past needs to be preserved. But all the great things in the past were, in their time, revolutionary, prophetic, or challenging. It changed or shifted the paradigm. Christianity became a conservative tradition, but if Jesus had been an arch-conservative, He would have been just another Jewish Rabbi, not a prophet.
Wagner is now just part of classical music repertoire, but if Wagner had just stuck to tradition, he wouldn’t have changed German music history.
In the end, identity must find inspiration. Cultural preservation is less important than the will to dream and create culture. If we emphasize conservatism and preservation uber alles, we’ll believe we have nothing unless we preserve what has been handed to us from the past. While cultural preservation is important, the prophet or visionary has the will to say that even if the past culture is lost, a new culture can be created from the heart and mind of the race as long as it has the will to fight and survive.
An arch conservative feels, “If my family house handed to me by my ancestors burns down, I won’t have a house since I depend solely on what was handed down to me.” But a prophet-visionary feels that “if the house given to me is burned own, I will use my genius to build a new house, even a better one.” It is that will to create and imagine that is the true source of racial greatness.
So much of Europe was destroyed in WWI and WWII but Europe came back fast and strong in the postwar decades. Why? How could a people have done so much after having lost so much? Because Europeans still ruled over Europe and had confidence as Europeans.
But today, Europeans have so much money and privilege, but they are losing their homeland and unable to do anything about it. Why? They’ve lost their will to survive as a race, their romantic will to create the future as a race. Late Modernism says everything has to be soulless, post-modernism says everything has to be frivolous, and globo-pop culture says everything must be disposable and trashy.
WWI and WWII killed tens of millions of Europeans, but Europe came back fast and strong. And there was also cultural explosion in cinema, music, and literature.
But at some time in the late 60s, a new intellectual trend led to European self-loathing. Today, Europeans are richer and safer than ever, but they have no will to survive, no will to fight, not much will to create.
Japan was smashed in WWII. 1/3 of its economy was gone, and millions had been killed, and more had been maimed. But Japan also came back fast and strong because Japanese still ruled over Japan and had consciousness as Japanese. After so much horror and tragedy in WWII, post-war Japan saw the great flowering of so much energy and creativity. Japan lost the war, Japan was smashed, but Japan was still a nation of Japanese with national pride. And with the new freedom allowed by American occupation, all sorts of things were possible.
But over the yrs, Japanese have grown decadent, spoiled, and soulless. It too is a dying nation soon to be flooded by tons of foreigners as Japan now eventually follows the trends in the West as Jews control all the elites in the world.
Now, how can the Alt Right produce a culture that is powerful? It must attract those with talent.
It is near impossible to formulate an ideological recipe for creativity.
Ideology alone can produce propaganda but not art and culture. Art and culture need genuine talent, genius, and ability.
Some people are born with it, most are not.
So, if a movement wants to produce arts and culture, it must attract those with talent.
Those with talent are not born with ideology even though their parents and teachers could instill them with certain ideological biases.
The Left has more talented artists not because Leftism necessarily is more creative. It’s because Leftism has been more appealing to those with talent. It just feels better to be talking about ‘inclusion’ than ‘identity’. It just feels better to talk of love than loyalty. Inclusion and love seem boundless whereas identity and loyalty sounds limiting.
But with PC idiocy having taken over Leftist ideology, the Alt Right might be able to put forth a set of arguments that might eventually attract people of talent.
Before there was great Christian or Islamic art, Christianity and Islam had to win over the people of talent. Having been converted to such faiths, men of talent created art in service of Jesus or Allah.
Win the moral and ideological argument, and then, dominance of culture and creativity will follow. Those who win the moral argument will attract men of creative talent who will then lend their genius to the ideology, vision, or movement.
Attracting intelligence is power. After all, a company that hires more intelligent people than the next company will win.
Likewise, a team that hires better athletes will beat those that hire less better athletes.
In arts and culture, the Left has been able to attract, convert, and recruit more people of talent and intelligence.
Also, the rules of PC reminds creative people that they will be blacklisted if they violate certain taboos.
Still, the problem of PC is that it may eventually alienate a lot of genuinely talented people who can’t stand the repressive nonsense. I mean imagine if you have the talent of Sophocles or Shakespeare, but the cultural commissars say you can’t do this or that because it might be ‘triggering’.
Libertarians hope that their championing of unfettered freedom will attract intelligence and talent to their side away from PC Liberals. But the reason why most intelligent and talented people reject libertarianism — despite its championing of unfettered freedom — is because people feel a need to serve and live for something ‘greater than themselves’. Libertarianism’s message is simply, “I want my freedom, I want to be free, I want to be me, me, me and I’m the center of the world.” It sounds like the Toys R Us song, “I don’t wanna grow up, I’m a Toys R Us kid”, and such silly vanity doesn’t inspire artists and entertainers who want a deeper sense of meaning in life.
Left may be PC and repressive at times, but it is about big themes like ‘social justice’ and ‘brotherhood of man’. Libertarianism’s message is “hey, I got my gun and my pot and my videogame, so leave me alone.”
But Alt Right can inspire people with something ‘greater than themselves’ that is worth fighting for, serving, and struggling for.
Though Alt Right should concentrate on white issues and insist on white survival, it could develop something like a comintern and make pacts with other races. David Duke has been sensible in this. Unlike some white nationalists who love to bash and put down other races, Duke supports all races and defends them and their right to their own homeland and culture.
Thus, his white nationalism is a kind of universal nationalism that says all peoples’ lands and heritages must be protected.
This bigness of heart, genuine or not, goes a long way to show that Duke-ism is something more than petty nationalism or ‘xenophobia’. Duke’s message is all races and cultures have value, and we should learn from them and share ideas with them. But each people are also owed their own homeland, and this universal nationalism is anti-imperialist.
Such an idea, if remolded by Alt Right, could be appealing to people of intelligence and talent who want both identity but also something more universally inspiring.
So, Alt Right should discourage gratuitous disparaging of non-whites and other cultures. Even as Alt Right needs to insist on the right of the West to remain white and European, it should show utmost respect to other races and cultures.
Also, Alt Right should reach out to all races and cultures and ask, “do you want globalist-imperialism to turn your nation into nothing more than a homo-celebrating decadent Disney-Walmart?” Surely, a Walmart IN a country is okay, but Walmart AS a country is ridiculous. Alt Right should have an international wing like comintern that leads the way in combating the forces of Zio-homo globalism everywhere. It should be the defender not only of white nationhood but national sovereignty everywhere.
Message to the world:
Your sacred heritage & identity OR do you want your daughter to become Miley Cyrus?
Progs say that race and identity are bogus constructs. Therefore, such should be done away with.
But they also say that non-whites need to maintain their identities since such were forced on them and used as excuses to oppress and disenfranchise them.
Following this logic, had it not been for white imperialism and ‘racism’, there should be no reason for any people to maintain their identity or preserve their race.
According to PC, ‘racist’ whites in America forced inferior identities on non-whites. So, some groups were oppressed or discriminated against as ‘blacks’, ‘yellows’, ‘reds’, ‘browns’, and etc.
Such identities of inferiority was forced on these groups, and such categories kept them down.
If the libertarian-conservatives argue that it’s time to end stuff like ‘affirmative action’ and just be ‘Americans’ than hyphenated-Americans, progs and people of color say that identity is still important for non-whites since there is subtle or hidden ‘racism’, and also, the negative legacy of the past will linger for some time.
Since their non-whiteness was invoked to keep them down in the past, non-whites must seek empowerment as ‘non-whites’ because, deep down inside, many whites still see non-whites as inferior, if only subconsciously or subtly.
Using such logic, the ONLY rationale for preservation of identity is oppression and dispossession.
Since white identity was formulated to gain superiority and privilege, it must be done away with totally. It was the identity formulated to oppress.
But since non-white identities were formulated to be oppressed & to be deemed socially and politically inferior AND since this legacy still remains(despite progress in attitudes and laws), the people of color must seek empowerment based on their identities before they can finally let their identities go.
Also, even the Donald has been totally silent on Jews, blacks, and homos, the big three powers of American anti-conservatism.
Both Alain De Benoist and Tomislav Sunic have written on democracy and Carl Schmitt’s interpretation of the concept. Both agree that, by Schmitt’s definition, democracy is, surprisingly enough, not anti-nationalist. According to Schmitt, democracy is not elections, and is not liberal parliamentarism and all the associated liberal freedoms: freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, speech, association, and so on. A distinction is to be drawn between democracy on one hand and liberalism on the other (Schmitt made that distinction, most famously, in his Crisis of parliamentary democracy (1923)).
Democracy is, in Schmitt’s view, a statement of identity. The simple definition of democracy is the rule of the majority. That definition, says Schmitt, implies that the members of that majority are identical to one another in some way, that is, that they hold some property in common, whether it be race, religion, ethnicity, or some quality – Britishness, Australian-ness. Democracy requires a homogeneity. And the sharing of that property, which leads to homogeneity, means that the sharers are politically equal.
As an example of democracy, Schmitt gives the examples of the ancient Greek city states of Athens and Sparta. Members of Spartan or Athenian democracy were equal to one another in possessing the virtue of a Spartan or Athenian citizenship. But a group within that democracy – the slave caste – were unequal, not possessing full political rights. So, at the root of democracy is the equality of equals (who make up the democratic majority) and the inequality of unequals (who make up the democratic minority).
Schmitt gives, as another example, the British Empire: did the 300 million citizens of the Empire possess the same rights, i.e., were they as equal, as Britons? Clearly, no: the citizens of the United Kingdom possessed political rights denied to others in the Commonwealth. Schmitt also cites Australia, and in particular, the application of the White Australia policy. Immigrants who were not white were to be excluded from Australian democracy, and all the benefits of Australian citizenship that come from being one of the majority, the ‘equal equals’.
It may seem, from the last example, that when Schmitt talks of homogeneity, he is talking of a racial homogeneity. But this is not necessarily the case. Some of the member nations of the British Commonwealth – Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa – were white, and yet not sharing the same rights as Britons. Likewise, it is uncertain whether or not the distinction between ‘slave’ and ‘citizen’ in the ancient world was a racial one – whether or not the Spartans were white and the Helots were non-white. And, on Schmitt’s definition, one could construct the idea of an Islamic democracy, where all the equal citizens are alike in that they are Muslim. One can also point out that the Jewish democracy – Israel – has members who are alike in their Jewishness (but not their race). (And, like a true, Schmittian democracy, Israel denies certain political rights to non-citizens – in particular, the non-Jewish Arab citizens, and the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories).
Schmitt’s notion of democratic equality stands in contrast to that of the liberal – for the liberal believes that all people, whether members of a democracy or no, are equal by virtue of being adult persons. Liberalism believes in a radical egalitarianism. In a truly liberal world, all distinctions between citizens and non-citizens in democracies, or equals and unequals, would be abolished. So, rightfully understood, democracy is the enemy of liberalism: the concept of ‘liberal democracy’ contains two contradictory creeds – liberalism and democracy – which threaten to tear it apart. Hence, ‘The crisis of parliamentary democracy’.
If we are to take Schmitt’s definition of democracy on board, we can see that immigration – massive non-white immigration – threatens American democracy. In fact, American democracy, in the past fifty years, has suffered two blows. The first was desegregation of Afro-Americans in the 1950s and 1960s; the other was massive Hispanic immigration from the 1990s onwards. Before the desegregation period, America could be said to be a democracy in Schmitt’s sense: its citizens – of European descent – were equal, its Afro-Americans unequal, denied full political rights of American citizenship. But, after de-segregation, America moved towards a liberal (non-democratic) equality: Americans and Afro-Americans were equal simply on the basis of their being adult persons. Now the same, anti-democratic process is occurring with the apportioning of political rights to the massive numbers of Hispanic immigrants, legal or illegal.
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
