How liberals victimize blacks

Unless you live in a cave, you’ve heard it a million times: Blacks are victims of white oppressors. We are supposed to believe that black people suffer from white racism from cradle to grave, that they find it difficult to get jobs, advance their careers, get fair trials or even get into prestigious schools. We are supposed to believe this – but all it takes is a little research and objectivity to discover it is all lies.
But let’s take a look at a recent article from entitled “The 5 Stages of Black Manhood”:

… I have found that Black men experience this world in ways that are quite similar to the widely known Kubler-Ross “5 Stages of Grief” model:
1. Denial. In his life, every Black man is afforded a period of unburdened optimism. The length varies for each individual, and some may not remember it. Whether it lasts until they turn five or 50, there’s at least a moment where a Black man can look out into the world and see it as full of opportunity. There exists no limits in his mind as to who or what he can become. It’s a time free of history’s lessons and society’s prejudices …
2. Anger. Who can blame Black men for being angry? You’re born into a legacy that includes slavery, lynching, Jim Crow, marches, protests, and riots. From the moment you’re old enough to know what it is, you’re told that it’s likely you’ll end up in prison, and you start to believe it as you watch fathers/uncles/brothers/cousins be hauled off. Everywhere you go, you’re viewed as a problem that needs to be solved.
How can you not be angry when it seems like every other week you’re learning the name of another brother you’ll never meet, for all the wrong reasons? Trayvon Martin. Sean Bell …

The article goes on to say some outrageous things, such as the claim that black men suffer from depression more than others. The opposite is true. But I want to focus on point number 2. No-one can deny that black men are angry. They are angry from the moment they learn to talk. Their music is full of anger, and their lives consumed by it. Often, their lives are extinguished by it or it motivates them to  extinguish the lives of others.
What is the source of this anger? The true, authentic, legacy of slavery is gone. What we have today is an industry of artificially propagated anger, hate and resentment whose tools of choice are school textbooks and the media. The ancestors of many whites suffered serfdom for a much longer period of time than black Americans suffered slavery – and the serfdom, in many cases, continued on into much more recent times as well. Today’s blacks should not be angry over slavery. They should be angry over the fact that liberals have force-fed them the “legacy of slavery” to the point where they’ve become crippled because of it. I would much rather be around a dull-witted black man with a good attitude than an intelligent one with a chip on his shoulder over something that ended 150 years ago.
Should black men be angry over lynching? Only if they are fed an assortment of lies by the liberal establishment. As I’ve pointed out in a previous post, most lynching victims were white. Most black lynching victims were criminals, and only a minute number of blacks were lynched because they were black. Furthermore, blacks also participated in lynch mobs. Read more about lynching here. Again, blacks should not direct their anger at white racist lynch mobs of the past, but rather at the liberals who have filled their heads with lies.
Jim Crow may not have been fair, but it was a practical way for whites to protect themselves against pervasive black violence. In our generation, the media does its best to hide the magnitude of black-on-white crime. It has  not been very successful – except when it comes to the most gullible sectors of society. Personally, I prefer voluntary segregation. But, if black culture is something to be celebrated to the point where it merits its own publications (such as Ebony), then why should black men be angry over being deprived of the company of whites? On the contrary. They should support segregation, because it allows them to enjoy their own culture without interference from racist whites. Separate but not equal may, indeed, have been the rule in the Old South. But does it really make sense to be angry today over inferior schools 60 years ago? Is it not ironic that that same anger contributes to black schools being inferior today? Your grandparents had to sit at the back of the bus? Get over it! I can understand being angry over such things for a week. Maybe for a month. But at some point the time comes to move on.
“Marches, protests and riots” are certainly things to get angry over – if you’re white or Asian. After all, it’s almost always blacks doing the rioting (euphemistically called “protests” by the media). If black men are angry over these marches, protests and riots, then I would suggest that they stop participating in them.
Should black men be angry that they’re told they’ll likely end up in prison? Perhaps – if this were the case. But this is not how blacks are portrayed by the media. Instead, they’re portrayed as super scientists, charismatic politicians, heroes and selfless martyrs. They’re consistently held up as the ultimate of manhood. Black kids watch more television than any other group, so their minds are infused with heroic, positive, masculine portrayals of black men. Perhaps they are so accustomed to this that they don’t even realize it, and when they are exposed to a not-so-positive portrayal of black men, they recoil in horror.
“How can you not be angry when it seems like every other week you’re learning the name of another brother you’ll never meet, for all the wrong reasons? Trayvon Martin. Sean Bell…” Again, it’s the liberal media black men should be angry with. It’s the media that blows such incidents out of proportion, while ignoring the alarming number of horrific crimes committed against whites. Whites are the real victims here – but blacks also get a few crumbs of victim-hood. After all, they are condemned to perpetual anger.

This entry was posted in Africa and blacks. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to How liberals victimize blacks

  1. Yew says:

    “The article goes on to say some outrageous things, such as the claim that black men suffer from depression more than others. The opposite is true. ”
    You think Black men suffer from overconfidence like it said about fat black women, that they don’t experience low self esteem and body image issues like other women? Well, one does not exclude the other. One can exude some sort of confidence, real or feigned, and simultaneously suffer from depression. I think that’s one reason why alcohol and pot smoking are so prevalant amongst Black American men – they use those to drown out or smoke out their depression.

  2. ethnicmuse says:

    Could you give some examples of positive African American media portrayals? How does this relate to the negative portrayals as rapists/thugs in shows like Law & Order for example?

    • jewamongyou says:

      You must be joking.

    • It’s hard to know where to start. If you take a given show, the most serious, morally spotless, and (above all) intelligent character is likely to be black. I haven’t seen much TV in five, maybe seven years so I’m way behind the times, so I only have one sort-of recent example:
      The black doctor on House MD is super-intelligent, and also a much nicer and more serious guy than Dr. House.
      Previous to that:
      In a run of many seasons, most of the male detectives on Homicide: Life on the Streets were involved in extrajudicial killings, i.e., they murdered criminals in cold blood. Both of the black detectives, plus the morally spotless black lieutenant, never killed anyone in cold blood. The same could only be said of the women, plus one of the white detectives who killed himself, plus Ned Beatty’s character (who is one of the least effective men on the squad, though genial, and is eventually fired for drunken antics in public).
      A much smaller proportion of the homicides on the show are committed by blacks than are in real-life Baltimore, but I still laud the show both for reasonable realism (showing a fair number of black gangland killings) and creativity (being able to make them interesting despite the banality of their evil).
      Can anyone think of a crooked or drunken black cop on a TV program? I can think of several crooked/drunken white cops.
      To that you can add tons of black scientists and doctors, fawning portrayals in TV commercials, the heavy-promotion of black-dominated professional sports, and the mere idea that professional sports are an enormous moral and spiritual undertaking. If you need more examples, AntI-White Media has plenty (although IMHO it blames hostile Jews too much and apathetic/lazy gentiles not enough)

      • ethnicmuse says:

        The ‘black’ doctor on House is an anal character who is an obvious token. He is intelligent but with a checkered criminal past and his brother is also a criminal. He fornicates just like the rest of them. Almost everyone is nicer than House regardless of ethnicity which is the point of the show. While I understand the assertion that Africans are skewingly portrayed as good on TV has some basis, this assumes that all portrayals are good and that a token good is going to bolster ethnic pride. The Asian female doctor is also a token character and Europeans may say look at that model minority, how intelligent she is. However, she is a stereotype and does not help the viewing Asian think better of themselves. In essence, I would argue that token good non-European characters are more for the good of the European than for others.

    • TWTS says:

      I don’t watch TV much anymore, but from the commercials I see it’s usually a black guy and white guy hanging out, both are terribly dumb and it’s always a black woman and white woman who have to come along and solve their problems. I think the magical negro on tv has been replaced by the magical female.
      As for your comment about the token minorities, of course that’s the case. Hollywood is run by white liberals who live by whites, are surrounded by whites and know very few if any non-whites, and it’s usually Asians if they do know any. Liberals don’t care about black and brown people, they care about feeling good about themselves. Putting a smart black person on a show makes them feel good, and that’s all that matters to them.
      “However, she is a stereotype and does not help the viewing Asian think better of themselves.”
      Regardless of race or ethnicity, if you’re watching TV so that characters who look like you can make you feel better about yourself, you probably deserve to feel shitty.

      • ethnicmuse says:

        The problem it seems to me is that tokenism is inherently bad for all involved whether it is a positive or negative portrayal.
        Regardless of race or ethnicity, if you’re watching TV so that characters who look like you can make you feel better about yourself, you probably deserve to feel shitty. – I would agree but with a caveat i.e. consistent negative stereotypical portrayals demean an ethnic group and bolster the dominant ethnic group’s perception of the slighted ethnicity while reinforcing their supposed superiority

  3. Yew says:

    Victimhood is a useless ideology. Better to be pro-active and stand your ground than whine about oppression. Its like women who complain about male dominated religions. Invent your own! Nobody is stopping you.

    • ethnicmuse says:

      From personal experience, it is not easy to escape a culture of oppression or victimhood when your very identity depends on it, moreso for African Americans whose identity AND masculinity depends on past aggression

  4. SFG says:

    I don’t know if it’s the liberals, I think it’s just the sad result of IQ and time-preference. I’ve been to the South and, you know, you look around and 150 years and billions of dollars later the descendants of slaves are still doing the dirty work. I’m not saying there’s much we can do about it, but I don’t blame ’em for being pissed.

  5. Annoyed says:

    I’m pretty sure the only ones who victimize blacks happen to be other blacks, if anyone else did it it would be a hate-crime and we would never hear the end of it.(not that blacks don’t complain enough already)
    Blacks don’t want to create, they want to take from others. As a group they appear to have no vision except seeing something they want and then screaming and yelling until they get it. They are the literal pets/children of liberal ideology.
    Let me give an example.
    Suppose your local area doesn’t have a pool but you want one.
    White response: “Lets get together and levy the funds to build a pool”.
    Black response: “It’s racist white people get pools, I demand free transportation to white communities with pools or else I will riot/burnthings/etc.

    • TWTS says:

      Look at whats been happening at McCarren Pool in NYC, doesn’t matter what you give them, they just revert to their TNB.

  6. It’s not only observable but intuitive that blacks would get less depressed than whites.
    Blacks tend more often than not to be alpha, owing to greater testosterone levels and subsequently, less social inhibition (though confidence has numerous factors). This gives them greater access to mates and mates of higher quality, a major contributor to happiness. Stereotypes don’t come out of nowhere.
    Invert that for the whites and asians on the opposite ends of the spectrum. Asians to a greater extreme. If you are of low sexual market value, you will regard yourself as expendable, which will contribute to suicidal modes of thinking. Furthermore, people of higher intelligence will be more inhibited and make more honest assessments of their place in the world. I hate to think of all those poor Chinese men, really.
    Of course, that’s going by crude weak correlations in testosterone and intelligence levels.

    • I have heard it asserted that Blacks don’t actually have higher testosterone levels than Whites. Will try to look it up; no promises.

    • Eh. Peter Frost backs you up.
      Robert Lindsay has a summary that partly does and partly doesn’t:
      Blacks have much higher testosterone levels than Whites from age 7-24. After 24, the difference starts shrinking, and by the early 30′s, it is gone. In later years, White men have higher testosterone than Black men. This makes it very difficult if not impossible to explain differing behavioral variables, including higher rates of crime and aggression, in Black males over the age of 33 on the basis of elevated testosterone levels.

Leave a Reply

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