The mulatto industry

Wherever there is a demand, enterprising individuals and companies come forth to fill that demand.  This is the basis of the free market.  People are willing to pay for goods and services.  But there are also artificial needs.   When government dictates that automobiles must meet certain emission standards, companies (or thinly disguised government agencies) materialize to provide testing and certification for automobiles.  When politicians create war, plenty of bids are forthcoming to manufacture ever more deadly weapons.  Millions of attorneys owe their livelihoods to the vexing web of rules and regulations we call “the Law”.
So it is with diversity.  Government demands that large businesses keep certain quotas of “minorities” in their hiring.  Even when there may be no specific law stating that such and such number of blacks must be hired, nevertheless a de-facto law exists where companies risk expensive lawsuits if they do not comply.  Powerful entities, such as the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP stand ready to enforce these quotas.  Companies live in fear of them.
Though most will deny it, it is obvious to all but the most dense that pure* blacks do not generally make the best employees.  (If they were better employees, or even just as good as whites – but with the added benefit of “diversity” – then companies would not need to be forced to hire them; they would do so on their own to enhance their own profits.)  I have seen this in my own experience; the truth is obvious for all to see – but none dare speak it.  So, it is in a company’s best interest to avoid hiring blacks.  I’ll point out the obvious and note that some pure* blacks are excellent employees – but, like so many other things in the business world, this is a numbers game.
How do companies reconcile their best interests with the demands of government in this case?  The answer is mulattoes.  A mulatto tends to be more intelligent, hard-working and agreeable than a pure* black.  The “one-drop rule” is helpful here; even a person whose great great grandfather was black can consider himself “black” and help his company fill its quota.  So, by “mulatto”, I include quadroons, octaroons etc. for this purpose.
The very same government that created the artificial need for blacks, also takes advantage of this same loophole.   Many “blacks” who occupy higher government offices are mulattoes.  Collin Powell, Eric Holder and, of course, Barack Obama are all mulattoes.  Of course, when it comes to membership in Congress, higher intelligence is not a requirement.  The only qualification for becoming a Congressman is to win a popularity contest.  But, for appointed offices that require actual thought and planning, while including high visibility, mulattoes are the perfect fit.  Unfortunately for us, in their quest to prove their blackness, mulattoes are often the greatest haters of whites.
Mulattoes in government mean more oppression for whites.  Mulattoes in business, useful as they are for keeping companies out of trouble, are still affirmative action hires.  Therefore, they will tend to be of inferior quality compared to whites and they will tend to lose money for those businesses.  These losses are passed on to us in the form of higher prices for everything.
Affirmative action, and the quotas it entails, increases the price of products and services – but it cheapens the people who most often buy them.  Within this caste-system, mulattoes command a higher price than whites or blacks.

*by “pure black”, I mean somebody whose ancestry is overwhelmingly black African.

This entry was posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites, miscegenation, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to The mulatto industry

  1. Bay Area Guy says:

    I don’t know, JAY, in some ways, mulattoes can actually be worse.
    Jeremiah Wright comes to mind. At times, it seems that light-skinned blacks overcompensate by making a big deal of their blackness and adopting a hostile attitude towards whites.
    Also, at least with pure blacks, you know where they stand. With mulattoes (such as Barack Obama), they can be more devious, and pretend to be friendly towards whites, while simultaneously harboring their black grievances.
    Well, let’s just say I’m not a big fan of blacks in general, mulatto or non-mulatto.

    • Matthew J Montoya says:

      WTF is wrong with you guys. Are you so scared out of your wits that you make things up? If there is any gene pool that is of lesser quality, it is the gene pool of ignorant morons like yourselves. Assuming white slave owners are of higher gene quality, and slaves are of lower quality, is asenine. I’m embarrassed you get the privilege to call yourselves Americans.

    • says:

      I really enjoyed reading your blog. However, you fail to realize that the one-drop rule has since been rescinded starting with Loving v. Ohio, 388 U.S.(1967) . And for anyone attempting to claim African American (black) status for financial gain is violating federal law, since the U.S. Census only counts non-mixed people in the category of African American, and for which that is the basis of funding for employment, business adventures, education, housing etc for black people (African Americans). Therefore, African Americans (Biblical/black people) in American are U.S. Slave descendants who lack mixed ancestry. In other words, they lack white ancestry, and that is most of the cases in the U.S. Also, you must remember, not all African Slave Females were raped, as well as, not all whom were raped felt the need to nurture the wounds of slavery with their breast milk and/or vital resources, since their is no constitutional protection for social inclusion. And by the way, mulattoes are the greatest haters of African Americans since they have no race, and is an unfunded mandate(others) who possess no home country, or land of origination of their own,

      • jewamongyou says:

        Thanks for the interesting comment. It’s true that the one-drop rule no longer has legal standing, but it’s definitely used to promote the black race in general. For example, Obama and Holder are both considered “black” even though they’re, at most, only half black.
        I’m not sure what you mean by “Biblical/black people.” Few native American blacks (descendants of slaves) are pure black; most have some white/Native American admixture.

  2. countenance says:

    I think the psychological hang-up that mulattoes et al. have is simple — They depend on their white genes to be civilized, and their black genes to get them their AA brownie points. So their attitude is that if they can’t be pure white, then nobody else should be able to.

  3. SamBudy says:

    Do all American companies have to employ blacks or is that only the case when it comes to governemnt jobs?

  4. High Times says:

    Well, there’s mulattoes and then there’s mulattoes. Consider the origin of their white DNA. Up until recently *most* of the white contribution to the gene pool of African Americans originated from the bastard children of male white slaveowners and their female slaves. Given that wealth is a proxy for overall fitness, I think we can suppose that this genetic contribution resulted in a superior sort of mulatto. During the period between the end of the Civil War and, say, 1970, there was relatively little mixing between black and white and a mulatto elite evolved, as mulattoes bred with mulattoes. Recently though, since about 1970, there has been an explosion in Black male, white female pairings. Except for the occasional celebrity pairing, these tend to involve an alpha (relatively so) black male with a lower class white female. In this common current scenario consider that the white contribution is usually of low quality. What impact does this have on the relative fitness of mulattoes going forward in time?

  5. elitist says:

    One of the most astonishing things about American public life is the role of mixed-race individuals:
    virtually the entire African-American intelligentsia is at least 50% Caucasian, and the number of stars in science and scholarship who are black as opposed to mulatto is vanishingly small.
    Although the media seems to be tailored to identifying and showcasing black talent (real or nonexistent), and even using the absurd “one drop rule,” the results seem to be startlingly meager: no one seems to know where these “black” geniuses actually are.
    Can anyone explain this phenomenon??

  6. AP says:

    (1) The ‘One-Drop Rule’ was made ILLEGAL in the U.S. in 1967.
    (2) MOST of the “minority” slots in the U.S are (and always have
    been) filled by White Women — followed by — Gay White Males
    — followed by Veterans — followed by — Asian people —
    followed by — The Disabled — followed by — Latinos —
    followed by Amerindians — followed by — Multiracials
    — and then — lastly — all followed by “the Blacks”.
    In other words — although they are consistently (and very
    erroneously) used (by the media and political-pundits) as
    “the poster child” for the U.S. “affirmative-action” programs
    and laws — in reality — “the Blacks” are generally placed as
    “the last in line” when employers and academic institutions
    in the U.S. are looking around to fill-in their “minority-slots”.

    • jewamongyou says:

      It should have been obvious to you that my usage of the term “one-drop rule” was not the same as the original legal usage from days gone by. Have you ever known a person who possessed known black ancestry, but who could not consider himself “black” because he didn’t have enough black blood? At least according to PBS, the one-drop rule still applies.
      Regarding your assertion that most beneficiaries of A.A. are white women, this should lead us to oppose it even more. It should make us realize how vast, and all encompassing, this perversion really is. Perhaps some day, I’ll write a post about the evils of holding women to lower standards than men; many have already written about it. It’s a staple of manosphere blogs.
      But in no way does this diminish the fact that blacks are also held to lower standards. Employers cannot get away with hiring more women by finding more qualified people who are “half-woman.” There is no such thing. But there IS such a thing as a person who is “half-black” – and that is the subject of this post.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *