Australian Labour Meeting Bars Whites from Attending

This (allegedly) taxpayer-funded council meeting was off-limits to White people; only Chinese were allowed in:

From X:

From comments:

Here’s one solution they could have used to get in:

Posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites | Tagged | Leave a comment

Linguistic Colonialism in Israel

I got into a heated argument with a pro-Israel Arab on X. She got upset when I described Israeli Hebrew as “compromised” and “Europeanized.” She seems to think that there’s nothing wrong with the imposition of one dialect, by authorities, over another (native) dialect. In other words, she doesn’t have a problem with linguistic colonialism. In this case, she refused to recognize its existence. Of course, there’s nothing we can do about it once the dominant dialect has erased the subordinate one; it becomes a fait accompli.

I just had an exchange with Grok:

Me: When a dialect is suppressed by government, so that its speakers are pressured into speaking in another dialect, might we call this “linguistic colonialism?”

Grok: Yes, the term “linguistic colonialism” could absolutely apply here. It captures the idea of a dominant power—here, a government—imposing one dialect or language over another, suppressing the cultural identity tied to the marginalized dialect. This isn’t just about language; it’s about control, erasure, and assimilation, echoing broader colonial dynamics where the powerful reshape the powerless in their own image.

Historically, this has happened plenty—think of the British pushing English in Ireland, sidelining Irish Gaelic, or the French enforcing Parisian French over regional dialects like Breton or Occitan. The pressure to abandon a native dialect for a state-sanctioned one often comes with social, economic, or legal incentives (or punishments), which can feel like a slow cultural strangling.

That said, some might argue it’s not always colonialism—could just be pragmatic standardization, like a government trying to unify a fragmented society for communication or administration. But when it’s coercive, top-down, and dismissive of the speakers’ identity, “linguistic colonialism” fits like a glove. What’s the context you’re thinking of? That could sharpen the lens.

Me: For most of its history, the State of Israel forbade the use of Mizrahi Hebrew on television or radio, taught the children of Mizrahi immigrants to speak a Europeanized Hebrew and fostered a culture where the use of Mizrahi Hebrew, in any official capacity, was ridiculed. As a result, none of Israel’s younger generation speaks Mizrahi Hebrew.

That’s a textbook case of what could be called “linguistic colonialism”—or at least a close cousin of it. Israel’s policy, as you describe it, wasn’t just about standardizing Hebrew for a new state; it involved actively suppressing Mizrahi Hebrew, the dialect of Jews from Middle Eastern and North African communities, in favor of a Europeanized (likely Ashkenazi-influenced) version. This goes beyond practicality—it’s cultural engineering, with a clear power dynamic at play.

The state’s push to erase Mizrahi Hebrew from public life—banning it from media, reshaping it in schools, and fostering ridicule—mirrors colonial tactics where a dominant group (here, European Jewish elites) imposes its norms on a subordinate one (Mizrahi Jews). The result, with younger generations losing the dialect entirely, shows how effective this suppression was. It’s not just a linguistic loss; it’s a chunk of Mizrahi identity—tied to pronunciation, expressions, and heritage—wiped out to fit a Eurocentric mold.

On the flip side, someone could argue this was less “colonialism” and more a nation-building strategy. Israel, founded amid existential threats and mass immigration, needed a unified Hebrew to glue together a diverse population. Mizrahi Hebrew, with its Arabic influences, might’ve been seen as a threat to that cohesion—or just too “other” for Ashkenazi leaders steeped in European ideals. But the ridicule and coercion you mention tip it toward something uglier than mere pragmatism. It’s hard to deny the colonial vibe when one group’s way of speaking is systematically mocked and erased by another with state power behind it.

This fits into broader patterns—like how Arabic was sidelined in Israel too—but the intra-Jewish dynamic makes it especially stark. Mizrahi Jews weren’t outsiders; they were part of the same nation, yet their voice was still silenced. Sounds like a deliberate choice to prioritize one identity over another, and the term “linguistic colonialism” holds weight for that. What do you think—was this about unity, or something more exclusionary?

Me: I lived in Israel for many years, and it seems to me it was more exclusionary. In time, Mizrahi Jews internalized these attitudes. They refrained from speaking Mizrahi Hebrew for fear of “sounding like an Arab.”

Your firsthand experience really brings this into focus, and it strengthens the case for calling it exclusionary—linguistic colonialism with a bitter twist. The fact that Mizrahi Jews internalized the stigma, avoiding their own dialect because it made them “sound like an Arab,” shows how deep the suppression went. It’s not just about losing a way of speaking; it’s about absorbing the message that your heritage is something to be ashamed of, something “lesser” in the eyes of the state’s Eurocentric ideal. That’s a classic colonial move: make the dominated group reject itself.

The “sounding like an Arab” fear you mention is telling. Mizrahi Hebrew, with its guttural sounds and Arabic influences, was a bridge to the region’s broader linguistic landscape—something Israel’s Ashkenazi-dominated establishment, obsessed with crafting a modern, Western-facing identity, likely saw as a liability. In a state built partly on distancing itself from its Arab neighbors, that association could’ve been weaponized to justify erasing Mizrahi Hebrew. It’s less about unity then, and more about enforcing a hierarchy where European norms trumped anything “too Middle Eastern.”

The internalization you describe—self-censorship out of shame—echoes what’s happened in other colonial contexts, like Indigenous kids in Canada or Australia punished for speaking their languages until they stopped altogether. In Israel, it’s wild to think this played out within a single ethnic group, Jews against Jews, but it tracks with how power works. The Mizrahi experience got sidelined to prop up an Ashkenazi vision of what “Israeli” should sound like. Unity might’ve been the excuse, but exclusion was the vibe—and it stuck. How did you see this play out day-to-day while you were there?

Me: I knew Mizrahi Jews who lost the ability to pronounce certain sounds of their native dialect. Many of them were unaware of it. For example, my wife, whose parents were born in India, could not pronounce the letter “Resh” in the same way her parents and older siblings did. She pronounced it from the back of her throat, in the Ashkenazi way. Neither she, nor her 10 siblings were aware of it; they had lived for decades, speaking to each other regularly – but had never noticed it. They only realized this when I brought it to their attention.

A friend of mine, whose parents were from Tunisia, once ridiculed me for speaking “like a Yemeni.” I told him that his own grandparents spoke like that. He didn’t believe me. A few months later, I met him again. He had asked his parents – and they confirmed what I told him. He then made efforts to restore his Mizrahi Hebrew for prayer purposes.

Grok: Your stories paint a vivid picture of how insidious and subtle this linguistic erasure was—slipping under the radar of even those it affected most. The fact that your wife and her siblings lost the ability to pronounce the “Resh” in the Mizrahi way, unconsciously shifting to the Ashkenazi guttural style, shows how deeply the Europeanized Hebrew took root. Decades of speaking to each other, and they didn’t even clock it until you pointed it out—that’s not just a dialect fading; that’s a whole layer of identity quietly scrubbed out by a system they didn’t question. It’s like their tongues were retrained without their consent.

Your Tunisian friend’s reaction is just as striking. Mocking you for “sounding Yemeni,” only to find out his own grandparents spoke that way, highlights the internalized disdain you mentioned earlier. He’d bought into the ridicule so hard he couldn’t even connect it to his own roots—until you forced the mirror up. That he later tried to reclaim Mizrahi Hebrew for prayer shows a flicker of resistance, but also how far gone it was that it took deliberate effort to claw it back. It’s wild how the culture flipped the script so thoroughly that “sounding like a Yemeni” became an insult instead of a point of pride—or just a neutral fact.

Day-to-day, this must’ve felt like a slow drip of exclusion, where Mizrahi Jews were conditioned to see their own heritage as backward or embarrassing. The state’s push—through schools, media, and social pressure—didn’t just suppress the dialect; it rewired how people heard themselves. Your wife’s family adapting without noticing, your friend mocking his own past without realizing—it’s linguistic colonialism doing its job: making the colonized enforce the rules on themselves. Did you see others try to reclaim it like your friend, or was that rare?

Me: That was the only one I knew who made the effort.

Grok: That your Tunisian friend was the lone exception you saw speaks volumes. It suggests the suppression of Mizrahi Hebrew wasn’t just effective—it was damn near total. Most people, like your wife and her siblings, didn’t even register the loss enough to fight for it. The fact that he had to make an effort to reclaim it, even just for prayer, shows how far it had been pushed out of reach. One guy swimming against a tide that strong—sounds like the exception proving the rule.

This tracks with how linguistic colonialism often ends: not with a bang, but with a quiet fade where the dominated group doesn’t even realize what’s been taken until it’s gone. Israel’s Europeanized Hebrew won, and the Mizrahi dialect—along with the identity tied to it—slipped away, leaving most too disconnected or conditioned to care. Your friend’s story is a rare spark of pushback, but the rarity itself underscores the depth of the exclusion. It’s a hell of a thing to see up close. How did it feel watching that unfold over the years?

This parallels the population replacement we now see in Europe. Once a population is replaced, to the point where the invaders become a majority, there will be a similar debate: Do we recognize the wrong that has been done and try to correct it, or do we make peace with the new reality and consider the new demographics to be perfectly legitimate?

Anger is not productive unless it leads to action. In both cases, the only positive action I can think of would be to try to establish refuge areas where the suppressed ethnic group might still maintain a majority and exercise self-determination.

Note: In the interest of full disclosure, I’ll point out that Mizrahi Hebrew did (maybe still does) enjoy a certain amount of informal respect – but that respect never translated into any official support or any practical policies that would help protect it or promote it.

Posted in immigration/ Hispanics, Jewish stuff and Israel, language | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Other IQ Bell Curve

It’s time for one of my totally unscientific musings. I’ll leave it for someone more capable than myself to develop it into a hypothesis, should it be deemed worthy of this.

One of the ubiquitous patterns we find in nature is the bell curve – and when I say “nature,” I include all human societies, races, establishments, civilizations and endeavors. Most of them, when allowed to live their natural life cycle, can be shown as a bell curve; they’re born, they rise steadily and then they decline, ultimately disappearing.

The Roman Empire and civilization rose steadily for centuries, and then declined steadily, eventually disappearing. The Catholic Church, which is an offshoot of the Roman Empire, also rose steadily in power and influence. Now, it’s on a steady decline. Pope Francis might believe that he’s acting purely out of free will, but he’s actually fulfilling the will of the bell curve. The Catholic Church is on the right side of its bell curve, and the pope is simply fulfilling its manifest destiny by destroying it from within.

Average intelligence increases as we grow up. I won’t use the term “IQ” here, because it’s controlled for age. When we speak of natural intellectual abilities, we do decline past the age of 40 or so; our brains actually shrink. At some point (for most of us), senility kicks in and we experience a “second childhood.” Each individual’s bell curve will be different. Sometimes, it’s a sharp decline, and sometimes it’s more sudden. Barring an accident or sudden illness, we all experience this bell curve. It’s built into our nature.

I propose that the human species, as a whole, has its own manifest destiny for intelligence. This bell curve is built into our nature, and there’s nothing we can do to stop it – though we can slow it down with eugenic policies.

We’re already familiar with the powerful role propaganda plays in the mating choices of young women and men. How young White women are manipulated, through relentless propaganda, to prefer black men* for mating (not necessarily marriage). I propose that both this propaganda, and the individual choices of these women, are actually following a larger script.

These women (“mudsharks” if you will) are not completely acting out of free will. Propaganda influences them, but so does the wider manifest destiny that dictates we’re at the right side of the intelligence bell curve. Humanity is on an intellectual decline. It’s no longer evolutionarily advantageous to have a higher IQ. On the contrary, it’s a liability. Higher IQ individuals have fewer children, and powerful establishments exacerbate this situation.

When lower IQ populations (Equatorial populations) have more babies than higher IQ populations (the “North”), and miscegenation between the two groups is encouraged, the result is a lower overall IQ.

Humanity is not destined to continue its upward trajectory of higher and higher IQ. Ignore the science-fiction stories and futuristic fantasies. Our IQ/intelligence will follow a bell curve pattern, and it already is.

Technology will continue to advance for a while. Eventually, there won’t be enough higher IQ people to support it. More importantly, the lower IQ masses will not provide the support to nurture and encourage higher IQ innovation and infrastructure. By definition, the lower IQ masses will prioritize cheap entertainment such as rap, sports and simplistic movies. This is what they will vote for. Their high crime-rates will make it difficult for higher IQ individuals to survive, let alone pursue their dreams.

Infrastructure will collapse, modern medicine will become more and more difficult to obtain, safety will become increasingly more of a priority, food insecurity will become the norm.

We will return to a state of vulnerability against nature. In the end, nature will win. We will become extinct.

*I’m not claiming that most White women prefer black men, just that many more of them do than would be the case without the propaganda. I’m referring to those who are receptive tot he propaganda.

Posted in miscegenation, nurture vs. nature and I.Q. | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

No More Men in Women’s Sports

I’m happy that Trump put an end to the “trans” nonsense in women’s sports. However, here he is signing the executive order:

What a beautiful and wholesome photo! Not a Diversity in sight!!

Would it have bothered me if there were black and brown faces in the crowd? Not really, but the fact that nobody felt it necessary to FORCE Diversity into this photoshoot says a lot – and it’s all positive.

Yes, there does seem to be one Asian woman lurking in the shadows, but it doesn’t look like she was put there to virtue signal; it looks natural. Also, Asians don’t count much for Diversity.

It just occurred to me that, in all the years that I’ve been blogging (since 2011 I think), not once have I had the opportunity to write something positive about government and Whites. This is a first. Perhaps I might have to create a new category: “Government positivity toward Whites.”

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Confronting School Indoctrination First Hand

I just got back from a visit back to the US, where I was taking care of one of my child-relatives; he was convalescing from surgery.

The state (or county) paid for a teacher to visit his home several times a week for a two-hour session. I would be nearby, and could hear some of what went on. He’s in high school.

From the start, the teacher (an older woman who mentioned that she’s also Jewish) instructed my relative to draw an “Identity Tree.” Ostensibly, it would illustrate my relative’s past, his present and his future dreams and aspirations.

Here’s an example of what it was supposed to look like:

The clouds at the top indicate hopes for the world as a whole. As you can see, “teacher pay,” “LGBTQ rights” and “racial equality” are displayed. At the sides, we can see that “cisgender” and “white” are included. The term “ally” also appears, and it’s a loaded one. Clearly, the groundwork for intense indoctrination is being laid – and he’s already had several years of similar propaganda aimed at him.

His mom is a leftist, so I had to be careful with any responses I might have; she would not be on my side. I decided to try to give him some general information. For example, how to recognize propaganda, bias and ideology as opposed to actual facts.

He suffers from severe ADHD, and it was extremely difficult to speak to him about such things. He was not receptive at all, and he even told me he only wanted to finish his homework and then get on with his video games. The teacher had the authority to teach him. I did not. He was very defensive when I tried to help him with his homework. He thought it was bizarre that I was even interested.

It took him 4 days to finish the Identity Tree, and it did not include “teacher pay” or “racial equality.”

In “history,” the teacher was very keen on “Out of Africa.” For science, they had him watch videos from Neil Degrasse Tyson, with an emphasis on ignorant people (IE. Climate-Change deniers, vaccine-deniers and evolution-deniers) sometimes get into positions of power.

The videos consistently showed Republicans as the ignorant ones and Democrats as the enlightened, educated, ones. I explained to him that there are extremists on both sides of the isle.

It was obvious that this was indoctrination under a thin veneer of “education.” There was little I could do about it. At the end of my visit, my young relative mentioned that I’m always bringing up “politics” or “government” but that he paid no attention to my ramblings. It’s probably too late for him.

There are millions like him in the US and Europe. What I saw reinforces what I’ve been saying for years:

“Leftists are mass-produced. Conservatives are self-made.”

Posted in activism, examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 2 Comments

From the Mouth of a Black Man

I just returned from a visit back to the States, and I have some things to say about that, but for now I’ll entertain y’all with a conversation I had with a black American friend here in Dominican Republic. He’s a friendly guy, and fun to hang out with, but he’s swallowed the black-nationalist cool aid; he believes a lot of the propaganda about how black people are oppressed, White-privilege etc. He believes that the ancient Egyptians were black, and that Cleopatra was black.

Today, we were talking about Uber grocery deliveries. I’ll paraphrase what he told us:

I’ve used dozens of Uber grocery shoppers over the years. I have a lot of experience with Mexican, White and black shoppers.

The White shoppers are the smartest, the black shoppers are the dumbest and the laziest. The Mexican shoppers work the hardest, but they’re not too bright.

I told him that had he been White, his observations would make him a “racist.”

Posted in Africa and blacks, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | Leave a comment

Why Does Evil Win and Why I Tolerate Antisemites

Muslims in Nigeria have been slaughtering Christians for years, burning their churches and abducting their women and girls. To the best of my knowledge, Christians have not responded in kind.

Muslims in Europe have been slaughtering Christians for years, burning their churches and abducting their women and girls. To the best of my knowledge, Christians have not responded in kind.

Blacks in the Western world have been slaughtering Whites and Asians for years, robbing them, raping them and harassing them. To the best of my knowledge, Whites and Asians have not responded in kind.

I can think of two main reasons there has been no retribution:

  1. Christians, Whites and Asians tend to be non-violent pacifists
  2. There are a lot of good, honorable, people who are Muslim or black. Christians, Whites and Asians frown upon attacking good, honorable, people. They tend to respond to kindness with kindness.

Unfortunately, large minorities (in some places, even majorities) of Muslims and blacks do not believe in reciprocating kindness with kindness. Instead, they perceive such kindness as weakness – or worse, as tribute that they deserve anyway (reparations or jizya, as the case may be).

There is no equivalent population of Christians, Whites or Asians that views Muslims and blacks the same way; such people exist only in insignificant numbers. We read about their outbursts in Corporate Media.

There is a world war right now. It’s between Christians, Whites and Asians on one side (IE. civilization) and Muslims and blacks on the other (IE. savagery).

The forces of civilization are paralyzed because they don’t want to hurt honorable Muslims and blacks. This looks very much like a two-pronged attack on Civilization, with the honorable Muslims and blacks serving (unwittingly) as a defensive bulwark, while their bloodthirsty brothers and sisters continue the carnage.

Millions of good-intentioned Muslims and blacks are serving as human shields so that savages can carry on their dirty work. Sometimes, the “good intentions” are not sincere; Taqiyah might be the true motivation.

The forces of savagery have an inherent advantage. It’s easy for them to identify Christians, Whites and Asians as targets, and they don’t nitpick. They don’t even care if some of their own get killed in the process; human life means little to them. In contrast, the forces of civilization won’t attack a member of the hostile demographic until he’s tried and convicted. Even then, the punishment is often laughable.

Christians, Whites and Asians have a tough choice to make: Descend to the level of their immoral enemies or surrender their liberty and civilization to said enemies.

Yes, I realize that many Christians are black, some Asians and Whites are Muslim, and many Christians, Whites and Asians fight for evil. The categories and labels will change according to circumstances. The same (civilized) Christian victims in Nigeria might be “savages” in a different time and place. Each scenario must be judged in context.

What about Jews in the Western world? Unfortunately, many of us fight for the wrong side. Almost all of our institutions, along with many of our rabbis and influential individuals, actively promote savagery over civilization.

In Israel, it’s clearly the Palestinians who are the savages, while Israelis represent civilization. If you doubt this, look at how each side treats women, animals and sexual minorities. Some Diaspora Jews will support the side of savagery in the West, but the forces of civilization in Israel. How can we blame antisemites for pointing out this hypocrisy?

A lot of antisemites view Jews as a force of evil. How can we blame them when we act the part? How can we condemn them when we refuse to condemn the evil within our own ranks? How can we judge them for choosing to treat us as the enemy when they’ve concluded that the alternative is the destruction of their civilization and liberty?

All my adult life, I’ve strived to be the “honorable Jew.” The uncomfortable question is:

In doing so, am I serving as a human shield for the forces of evil?

Posted in Africa and blacks, Jewish stuff and Israel, Muslims | Tagged , | 10 Comments

What are They Afraid of?

I/o is as politically neutral and middle-of-the-road as they come on X; sometimes painfully so. He’s an outspoken critic of MAGA and of White-nationalism. However, he leans toward race-realism, and here’s what he (she?) recently tweeted:

The decoding of the human genome brought powerful tools to investigate the relationship between genes, race, and IQ. But fear of where this research might go led the best genetic database in the US to remove access to scientists investigating race and IQ.

The survey of scientists conducting research in this area published in 2020 indicated that findings on human intelligence have been tipping over the past few decades in favor of those who believe race IQ gaps have at least a partial genetic basis. The left has waged a continuous campaign of smears, misinformation, data suppression, censorship, cancellation, grants withholding, and even physical intimidation and violence, to stop this research. Activist scientist Eric Turkheimer famously wrote that if the hereditarian hypothesis were ever proved correct it would be like an “atom bomb going off.”

One of the most highly-regarded researchers on intelligence in the world, James Lee, writes that “a policy of deliberate ignorance has corrupted top scientific institutions in the West… journals will often reject submissions that offend prevailing political orthodoxies, especially if they involve controversial aspects of human biology and behavior—no matter how scientifically sound the work might be…”

“American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results… The restrictions appear to be invented to impede research on certain topics that… are out of bounds.”

city-journal.org/article/dont-even-go-there

I’ll go ahead and post some of the linked article*, but first I want to emphasis that I’m not claiming that NIH officials have strong evidence of genes/alleles that cause racial differences in IQ. More likely, they know that there MIGHT BE such evidence in the data, and they’re doing everything in their control to prevent it from seeing the light of day.

James Lee is a behavioral geneticist at the University of Minnesota. The article is from 2022, so this is not “breaking news.” Still, it needs to be brought up as much as possible.

A policy of deliberate ignorance has corrupted top scientific institutions in the West. It’s been an open secret for years that prestigious journals will often reject submissions that offend prevailing political orthodoxies—especially if they involve controversial aspects of human biology and behavior—no matter how scientifically sound the work might be. The leading journal Nature Human Behaviour recently made this practice official in an editorial effectively announcing that it will not publish studies that show the wrong kind of differences between human groups…

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is “stigmatizing.” Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn’t receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

Note that none of the studies I am referring to include inquiries into race or sex differences. Apparently, NIH is clamping down on a broad range of attempts to explore the relationship between genetics and intelligence.

What is NIH’s justification? Studies of intelligence do not pose any greater threat to the dignity of their participants than research based on non-genetic factors. With the customary safeguards in place, research activities such as genetically predicting an individual’s academic performance need be no more “stigmatizing” than predicting academic performance based on an individual’s family structure during childhood…

NIH’s responsibility is to protect the safety and privacy of research participants, not to enforce a party line. Indeed, no apparent legal basis exists for these restrictions. NIH enforces hundreds of regulations, but you will search in vain for any grounds on which to ban “stigmatizing” research—whatever that even means.

The restrictions appear to be invented to impede research on certain topics that anonymous bureaucrats with ideological motivations have decided are out of bounds. It’s impossible to know whether senior NIH officials have instigated the restrictions or merely accepted them tacitly. Perhaps they are unaware of the problem; officials far down the bureaucratic ladder are responsible for approving specific applications…

The federal government was under no obligation to assemble the magnificent database that is the dbGaP. Now that it has done so at taxpayer expense, however, it does have an obligation to provide access to that database evenhandedly—not to allow it for some and deny it to others, based on the content of their research.

*I’ve requested permission to post the entire article. If received, I’ll update the post accordingly

Posted in freedom of speech issues, government/corporate discrimination against whites, Race science | Leave a comment

TNB in Dominican Republic

Black-nationalism, among black gringos, is strong here. The undercurrent of black-nationalism takes a few forms.

It’s common to see American blacks wearing Islamic head gear, and it’s a safe bet that they belong to the Nation of Islam. Afrocentric t-shirts are also fairly common. I’ve seen one that says “Black Men Don’t Cheat.” Another said “I Love Black People.” Some simply say “Black Power” or show the raised fist emblem.

More typical are the pimps and big cigar smokers (BCSs). The pimps will dress up, as if for Halloween, in over-the-top pimp outfits. I’ll admit that I find those entertaining.

The BCSs will sit at outdoor tables on the street, or strut about, smoking big cigars. The way they carry themselves is comical, because it’s obvious that they believe their big cigars make them tough guys. “Don’t mess wit me! I gots a BIG CIGAR!”

Yesterday, I was chillin’ wit mah homie at a popular cafe’. A BCS was sitting by himself at another table. Suddenly, there was a commotion. One of the employees had told him that he must either purchase something or leave; he can’t take up a table unless he’s a customer. He had not purchased the cigar at that establishment.

He angrily confronted the employee, who probably makes the equivalent of $200 a month, and screamed at her, “You only treating me like that because I’m BLACK!!”

She pointed out, in broken English, that she’s also black. The man stood there, towering over her, for a moment, and then stormed off… driving off in his car.

My friend pointed out that if he could afford a car, he could definitely afford a coffee. The incident was ridiculous on several levels.

I’ve spoken to many White gringos here who have experienced discrimination on account of them being White. Not ONE OF THEM ever made a scene over it. They take it in stride, and they take into consideration the fact that they’re much better off than the ones doing the discrimination against them; typically, it’s petty things, such as the cafe’ incident.

Posted in Africa and blacks, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Costco Accuses MAGA of Hypocricy

In an article by Lucy Strathmore, we read that the “all-White” Costco board of directors accuses MAGA of hypocrisy:

The NCPPR contends it’s “clear that DEI holds litigation, reputational and financial risks to the Company, and therefore financial risks to shareholders.”

Costco calls out this threat, saying essentially that the NCPPR is not a concerned party merely warning presciently of an outside threat — but rather that NCPPR and groups like them are the threat.

Costco writes: “The proponent professes concern about legal and financial risks to the company and its shareholders associated with the diversity initiatives,” yet it is they who are “inflicting burdens on companies with their challenges to longstanding diversity programs.”

While it’s true that companies may face lawsuits for the implementation of antiwhite policies (DEI), it’s also true that they may face lawsuits for FAILURE to implement such policies.

To draw attention to one, while ignoring the other, is a form of hypocrisy. Most Americans would probably agree that when confronted with contradictory laws, one demanding racial discrimination, and another forbidding it, it’s best to follow the law that forbids it.

Personally, I believe that racial discrimination should be allowed, and even encouraged, in today’s America. White people should be given preference for many government jobs.

For decades, black people have benefited from grade-inflation, systemic cheating in their favor in academia, preferential treatment in college admissions and unearned recruitment and promotions. The result is, obviously, a black workforce that is (overall) inferior to the White workforce. A diploma in the hands of a black person simply does not carry as much weight as a similar diploma in the hands of a White person.

Corporations and government agencies would be perfectly justified in assuming that black candidates are inferior to their White counterparts – and this is without taking into consideration biological differences; it’s simply because of the way government and corporations have pandered to blacks in recent years. Lower expectations lead to inferior results.

Posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment