Zionist crimes against Jews

Posted on March 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

Much has been made of Zionist crimes against Palestinians, real or imagined, but less widely known are their crimes against fellow Jews.  I have, in my possession, a booklet entitled “The Children of Tehran Accuse”.  It was published in Jerusalem, 1943 even as the crimes were coming to light.

Secular Zionists sent people throughout Eastern Europe to spread the word that Jewish orphans should make their way to Tehran, Iran where they would be taken care of amongst their own until such time it would be safe to bring them to the Promised Land.  In this way, several hundred holocaust orphans found themselves under the auspices of secular Zionists in a strange land.  The Zionists proceeded to abuse, neglect and persecute the children.  They also forcibly estranged them from their religious roots.  Following is an excerpt, translated from Hebrew by yours truly:

The children are gathered

One by one or in small groups the Polish refugee children were gathered to Iran.  In the Spring of their days was revealed to them the dreadful aspects of life.  Three years of wandering, hunger, sickness and want was their lot.  Some of them escaped alone from the oppressive sword of the Nazi, without parents or acquaintances, like wild animals pursued (their enemies) at their necks.  Others crossed the border to Russia accompanied by their parents and with their own hands buried their fathers and mothers in the Siberian snow…and, behold, was sprung upon them the rage of the “instructors”, who took control over them.

The Polish government had established, in Tehran, a large camp for all refugee children, citizens of Poland and saw to all their needs.  They understood that, for religious educational reasons, it’s important to separate the Jewish children from the Christian children.

Therefore they looked with favor upon the request by the “Jewish Agency” in Tehran, to establish a camp for Jewish children and they ceded control to them, to be responsible for those Jewish children.  At the same time they (the Polish government) continued to provide for those children from its own pocket.  Mr. Shaefer, representative of the Jewish Agency in Tehran (Mr. Rosenblum came out against him in “haboker” Feb. 5th, 1947 with serious accusations involving his care of Jewish issues, issues that are not relevant here), handing over the management of the camp to the attorney Rodzinsky, a refugee from Vilnius who was half assimilated.  The latter then handed over educational responsibility to a member of “Shomer hatza’ir” (a far left group), David Levinburg who was also a refugee and the only one who knew Hebrew from among all the original adults who arrived in Tehran.  His knowledge of the language served him well, it seems, for he received the responsibility over the education of the children.  David Levinburg chose instructors from among his friends and acquaintances as he saw fit.  Most of these were unfit both from a teaching credential standpoint and from a Jewish standpoint.  A great proportion of them couldn’t even speak Yiddish.  Dr. Hirshberg, who migrated from Tehran to Israel, confirmed this fact from a meeting of the instructors which took place in Itlit, when he said:

Among the great assembly of instructors were isolated individuals who turned to me and said, “We want to learn Hebrew” but most didn’t even say that.  This is painful to me, for an instructor must first learn Hebrew and only then can he teach it.  Without Hebrew and without a personal, and deep, relationship with Hebrew culture and without the Hebrew spirit, no instructor has the right to teach these children who are destined to be the Hebrew youth of Israel.

Favoritism was what determined who would be an instructor, this is also the reason why up to 733 children who dwelt in the camp had 65 instructors.  This means one instructor for every 11 children – in no other institution for children do we find such a high ratio of instructors.  (These numbers were reported by Madam Szold during her speech before the instructors in Haifa, two days before the arrival of the children).

Religious Persecution

During the month of Elul, 1942 the special Jewish camp was set up.  With the arrival of the days of awe, Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, the yearnings of these children, wise in the ways of the life of Torah, were especially strong.  After three years these were the first Jewish holidays that they would be able to observe properly more or less.  The instructors, who had decided to “prepare” the children for their future “experience in secular Israel” utilized every means at their disposal to stifle and uproot, in a calculating manner, any longings the children had for their religion and heritage.  The details of the lifestyle in Tehran were given to us via testimony by these children of Tehran: Nathan Alboym, 16, Avraham Frankle, 16:

Rosh Hashana.  On the night of Rosh Hashana all the children gathered together for evening prayers.  The prayers were fervent, emotional and full of tears.  The children prayed in the manner of their forefathers during the high holy days.  They prayed for the rescue of their families and for their own rescue.  The childrens’ prayers were viewed, by the instructors, as “hysterical nervousness” (so writes Bracha Habas in the name of Rodnitsky in her article in “Davar” from 18th Adar).  In the middle of the prayers, David Rosenberg entered and demanded to cease the prayers and to hurry up for a festive feast in honor of the holiday.  During the feast, none of the instructors or any members of the Agency refrained from smoking cigarettes – Rosh Hashana was on Sabbath that year (and smoking is strictly forbidden on Sabbath).  The following day the children sought to pray in the synagogue of Tehran.  Even though the prayers began at six o’clock, they were allowed to leave only at nine o’clock in the morning.  They reached the synagogue during the reading of the Torah.  The instructors forbade the children to enter inside the synagogue and so the children remained outside in the garden, even to hear the blowing of the shofar – no permission was given them.  After half an hour had passed, they took them from there and brought them to a coffee house.  A few of the children were able to sneak into the synagogue.  Those children were taken by force, via taxi, back to the camp.  The day after that they requested a shofar but their request was denied.

Yom Kippur.  After the kol nidre prayers, David Levinberg announced, in a loud voice, “children, time to eat”.  All the instructors sat down in the office, opened the windows completely and set up a feast in full sight of the children.  The witness, Nathan Alboym remained in the lobby until a late hour and recited psalms.  The instructor commanded him to cease and then turned off the lights.  The next day on Yom Kippur they transported the children to the city in buses, even though the camp was no more than twenty minutes by foot from the synagogue.  (This fact was certified by Mrs. Sertok, who visited Tehran on Agency business for a meeting with the council of Polish Jewry – attested to by Mr. Eliezer Sirkis) (travel, by motor vehicle, is prohibited on Sabbath and the holidays, including Yom Kippur).  They spent a short hour at the synagogue for the intent was to arouse the wealthy of Tehran to the plight of the children.  In fact wealthy donors pledged a sum of 60,000 Tomnis to benefit the camp.  One child sought to remain for the yizkor service to remember the souls of his parents.  The instructor Glicher struck him and removed him from the synagogue by force.

During the holiday of Sukkoth the children were not allowed to visit the city for prayers at all.  The children requested an ethrog for the benediction and were told: “for three years you were able to make do without an ethrog so you can do without one this year as well”.  During Simhath Torah they set up a party and distributed bread, butter and pig meat to honor the holiday.  They performed a play whose theme was the burning of the Holy Temple – not with prayer and mourning, rather with (joy that) the bricks would be used to build houses in Israel.

The issue of kosher.  The kitchen was not kosher (Mrs. Sirtok certified this fact during the above mentioned conference).  With minor effort it would have been possible to attain authorization and assistance from the Polish government to make the kitchen kosher, but the instructors refused to even raise a finger to this end.  At first many of the children refused to eat the non-kosher food.  They approached David Levinberg and asked him to increase their portions of bread or to give them other foods instead of meat and cooked foods that they don’t eat.  The above person refused using the excuse that there wasn’t enough money.  At that same time they were spending hundreds of Tomnis for theater and entertainment.  For David Levinberg’s birthday they purchased wine for the sum of 500 Tomnis, arranged a party for all the instructors, got drunk and carried on until the police got involved and arrested a few of them. 

Those who ate only kosher subsisted only on their regular portion of bread which was the same as was given to those who ate non-kosher.  There were instances of fainting and heart attacks from weakness and hunger.  David Levinberg told the doctor who treated one of the children who was fainting, who is the witness – Frankle: “who cares if one or two of them die from hunger.  Then they’ll give up on kosher”.  Over time, those who insisted on kosher diminished.  Not many were able to withstand this test after having been hungry for three years.  The child Binyamin Gezundheit related to Mrs. Wein, an instructor in a camp in Hadera (Israel) that when he demanded kosher food in Tehran they punished him and wouldn’t let him eat even permitted foods, until his will was broken and he ate non-kosher.  Frankel put together a list of children who requested kosher and it included about 250 names not counting the small children.  Only 14 children withstood the test and did not give in and it would be appropriate to recognize their names as a remembrance.”

The story of the Children of Tehran is only one example of the cruelty secular Zionists perpetrated upon their fellow Jews.  If there is interest, I’ll publish more of the pamphlet.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

From the mouth of leftists

Posted on March 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

At one point, I participated in a career retraining program paid for by the employment department and implemented by the local community college.  Some of the program, such as the refresher course on mathematics and grammar, was useful.  Other parts not so much.  We spent a few days on “diversity training” and the instructor spent quite some time stressing how important it is to avoid stereotyping or making generalizations about certain ethnic groups.  Then, toward the end of this module, we were given a document titled “Normative Communication Styles & Values For Cross-Cultural Collaboration”.  In plain English, this translates into: “what you can expect from different ethnic groups when it comes to communication if you’re working in a mixed group”.  The source, for this document, is “Candia Elliot Diversity Training Associates”,  “R. Jerry Adams, Ph. D, Evaluation and Development Institute” and “Suganya… Dept. of Human Resources, Oregon”.
The document deals with Anglo, Native, Hispanic, Asian and African groups.  It lists traits such as “Perceived right to set rules and agenda for meeting”, “Formal dress”, “Self-Identity…related to skin color or ethnicity”, “Ignoring ‘turns'”, “Self promotion”, “Gestures”, “Touching” etc.  Each group is rated as “Very little”, “Little”, “Medium”, “Much” or “Very Much”.
Here are the “Very Much” traits for Africans:
Animation/Emotional Expression
Gestures
Range of Pitch between words
Volume of speech
Directness of answers
Directness of rhetorical style, “getting to the point”
Ignoring “turns”
Self-promotion
Speed of Response
Collaborators must have community respect and support
Some participants, looking puzzled, asked the instructor how we could take this document seriously and, at the same time, reject “stereotypes”.  Indeed, we could easily rephrase the first seven traits as “crude, loud, undiplomatic and offensive”.  “Ignoring turns” could also be called “being rude by talking out of turn”.  “Self-promotion” could be “self-centered” or “selfish”.
Let’s look at how “Anglos” fair in the “Very Much” category:
Task-Based Purpose vs. Relationship
Written vs. verbal
Perceived right to set rules and agenda for meeting
Perceived right to speak freely at meeting
Formal dress
Perceived right to represent or speak for the group
Collaboration based on authority
Use first names vs. titles
Speed of Response
Directness of questions
Directness of answers
Directness of rhetorical style, “getting to the point”
Directness of eye contact
Firm, long handshaking
Concern with clock time
Individualism more than collateral group identity
The first thing that struck me is that any category starting with “perceived” is inhabited only by “Anglos”.  The implication is that “Anglos” feel entitled to more rights than they deserve.
In the “Very little” category, “Anglos” are the only ones listed for “Awareness of unearned ‘white’ privilege”.  We can only hope that this is accurate and that most whites do not believe in this imaginary bogeyman.  Not surprisingly, “Anglos” are also the only inhabitants of the category “Very little” when it comes to “Self-Identity… related to skin color or ethnicity”.   A somewhat positive way of looking at this would be that whites are the least “racist” of the groups.  However, I suspect that the leftists see this as a bad thing – since they expect whites to be intensely aware of their white skin and consider it a badge of shame.
Hispanics were rated as “Very little” within the trait of  “Concern with clock time”.  Perhaps this explains why every single Hispanic, at my workplace, disregards the rules when it comes to break times.  I suppose the leftists would forgive them for that and allow them longer breaks than “Anglos” in order to accommodate their “rich cultural heritage”.

Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 5 Comments

The cost of forced integration

Posted on March 2, 2010 by jewamongyou

According to La Griffe du Lion, black students improve (academically) slightly when they are placed among mostly white students.  White students, of course, suffer when blacks are introduced into their midst.  This minor benefit, to blacks, is limited to those individuals who are transferred to a more white environment.  What about black society as a whole?  Does it benefit from integration?  It seems to me that, as long as there are black neighborhoods, they will suffer because of integration programs.
Black neighborhoods will suffer because the brightest blacks siphon themselves off the top and remove themselves to white and Asian neighborhoods.  As a result, over time, black neighborhoods will get less and less intelligent overall.  As they become less intelligent, the incentive for the gifted will be even greater to leave.  This diabolical scenario is a result of leftist policies.  Leftist policies, having been translated into law, have created a huge demand for well-spoken and intelligent blacks.  Such blacks (often of mixed blood) can easily find high paying jobs in corporate America – which is forced to hire them to meet their “diversity” goals and avoid lawsuits.  Meanwhile, their brethren wallow in ignorance, crime, substance abuse and fatherless families.  The upwardly mobile blacks, having acquired all their more noble traits from whites, are usually not those who define “black culture”.  Instead, it is those who are left behind who define “black culture”.
Leftist ideology demands that blacks identify with their own culture and, indeed, every effort is made to exalt black heritage and culture.  This is the goal of “black history month”, “MLK day”, so many postage stamps, school assemblies, ethnic studies etc.
So we see that “black culture”, as practiced in America and most of the Western world, is defined by the lowest segments of black society.  We see that blacks are encouraged to identify with said “culture”.   Lastly, we see that this lowest segment of black society, “ghetto black society”, is deteriorating steadily because of brain drain.   This is the horrifying situation that leftists policies have wrought – but it doesn’t end there because it turns out that this “black culture” is being emulated by non-blacks as well.  Leftists have created a (pardon the pun) black hole situation and Western civilization is falling into it.
What is the solution?  Segregation – not by force of law but by force of social convention.  All that needs to take place is to let nature take its course and stop imposing forced integration upon us.

Posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites, pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 2 Comments

The crypto-hater

Posted on March 2, 2010 by jewamongyou

I’ve known some fine people, in my time, who happened to be black.  I enjoyed their company and genuinely valued them as friends.  What would they think if they saw some of the comments I’ve made online about blacks in general?  Most likely, they would feel betrayed.  Perhaps even violated – because they would assume that I had been deceiving them, pretending to like them while I actually hated them in my heart.  Confronted with two personae (one flesh and blood and the other an online entity), they’ll choose the online persona as the “real” one.  It’s easy to see why; the anonymity of the internet allows people to express their true feelings while doing so in public, or at work, comes with serious risks.  A more mature approach would be to ask me what I meant by my online comments and why I posted them.  Then, if they listened, they would realize that there is no contradiction.  Racial differences express themselves on the group/societal level.  An individual can be what he chooses to be; there is always some level of free choice when it comes to being forgiving versus vindictive, charming versus offensive, hard-working versus lazy.

I don’t think it should be our business to determine what secret emotions might lie deep within the psyches of our acquaintances.  Some of my best friends might be secret anti-Semites or anti-libertarians or anti-American.  As long as they treat me right and express no such animosity toward me, it makes no difference to me that, deep inside, there’s an ember of hate.  I suspect we all have private feelings we’d rather not reveal to our friends, family and co-workers.  One could only imagine the chaos that would ensue if all of our innermost thoughts became public.  Society would probably collapse.

We have free will regarding what comes out of our mouths.  I’m not sure we have free will regarding what comes into our minds.  Such things should certainly not be held against us.  I opine that internet posts are, in some cases, closer to thought than to speech.  If speech is a private matter that should not be limited by government, how much more so free thought.  But now I’ve strayed from the topic of this post.

Posted in politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 10 Comments

The "Jewish problem" and white nationalists

Posted on March 1, 2010 by jewamongyou

In case you haven’t already noticed, I’m Jewish.  But this does not blind me to the fact that there seem to be Jews lurking behind very many leftist movements and anti-white organizations.  How does a decent, law-abiding black feel when a high profile criminal turns out to be black?   It probably makes him sick to his stomach because, at some level, it makes him feel guilty by association.  Well I’m the same way when I discover Jewish names, symbols and organizations associated with causes that I hate.
Is there a vast Jewish conspiracy to exterminate white people or to take over the world?  If there is, somehow I did not get the memo.   Neither did Professor Michael Levin or Rabbi Mayer Schiller.  Books have been written on why Jews are particularly susceptible to leftist brainwashing and it is not the aim of this post to explore this.
I have had email exchanges with individuals, associated with the white nationalist movement, who refuse to believe that my motives are pure.  They’ll scrutinize every word of my comments on Amren in order to find “evidence” that I’m part of some “Jewish supremacist” movement.  They’d have just as much luck finding such “evidence” among random posts by gentiles because I do not believe in Jewish supremacy.  Just as a white person should care about his own people, put them first, advocate for them and identify with them so too should a Jew relate to his own people.  Just as such a white person need not be a “white supremacist” so too the Jew need not be a “Jewish supremacist”.  Of course, in my opinion, many Jews are also white so the same person can identify as Jewish and as white.
That there are Jews who sympathize with white nationalists should be a source of comfort.  Yet we find many white nationalists rejecting such sympathy.  I cannot delve into their minds but one of two things might be going on here.  Either they are so paranoid and suspicious that they truly believe people like me are spies or they find us upsetting because we spoil the well-ordered world they’ve constructed in their heads where all Jews must be evil.
Sometimes I visit white nationalist forums and I’ll find accusations leveled at “The Jews”.   A Jew of thinner skin might take personal offense at such words but it seems to me that, if it’s alright to speak of “white people” or “black people” or “Hispanics” in general terms (fully understanding that not all members of those groups adhere to the generality), then the same should be alright regarding Jews.  So I’ll give such people the benefit of a doubt and assume they know not all Jews are out to get them.
Many, if not most, white nationalists consider Jews to be non-white.  By what magic a religious conversion can change a person’s race I do not know.  It is a fact that many Jews are descended from white converts and so they are clearly white.  But it shouldn’t matter; Jews should consider themselves Jews and only marry other Jews anyway.  As for me, it makes no difference to me whether white nationalists consider me white or not.  Thankfully, I have my own identity that I’m perfectly content with.  One way or the other, this should not affect my sympathy toward white people.  Advocating for whites is a worthy cause no matter what race or ethnicity you happen to be.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 28 Comments

American Renaissance videos…

Posted on March 1, 2010 by jewamongyou

I have finally uploaded all the videos from the 2010 American Renaissance conference.
The only two speeches that are not shown there are those of Jared Taylor and Sam Dickson.  About 20 minutes into Dickson’s speech, my memory card ran out!  I know there’s a recording of his entire speech – because I saw Jamie Kelso recording it.  For some reason, I can’t find it now.  If anybody’s interested in seeing the first part of Dickson’s speech, I’ll be happy to upload what I’ve got to youtube.  Otherwise I’m sure if you ask Mr. Kelso, he’ll be happy to share his copy:
http://www.whitenewsnow.com/index.php

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The link between libertarianism and race realism

Posted on March 1, 2010 by jewamongyou

Many race realists are also libertarians.  There are several reasons for this:
1]  Both doctrines require thinking outside the box and an ability to resist pervasive propaganda.  In any society, only a minority of people have these capabilities and amongst them, only a minority are willing to openly espouse such views.  A person who has reached the conclusion that he has been fed lies, when it comes to the role of government, may also ask himself, “what others matters have they been lying to me about?”
2]  The concept of liberal democracy was built upon Western (read “white”) culture.  Like so many other inventions, the Asians never originated it for themselves in any  meaningful way – but they borrowed it from the Europeans.  Asians seem perfectly capable of maintaining Western-style societies just as they are capable of adopting Western technology and building upon it.  As for Negro, Melanesian and mestizo populations – it does not appear that building such societies is in their nature, at least not on a large scale.  Western governments have been aggressively importing “people of color” into traditionally white lands.  This causes increases in crime, especially violent crime.  Such crime then serves as an excuse to increase government power.  Actual crime is only one of several byproducts of “diversity” that is used to justify government power grabs.  Other byproducts include conduct that is not truly criminal  but is considered criminal by government.  These are “hate-speech”, ethnic intimidation, housing discrimination, employment discrimination and lack of “sensitivity” in education.  These are some of the issues that give greater meaning to libertarianism in the eyes of a race realist.
3]  Many, in Western lands, confuse prosperity with liberty.  They see clean streets, manicured lawns, well-staffed law enforcement, well-equipped hospitals etc. and they are happy.  They enjoy their new cars, large homes, exotic vacations, fancy cloths and electronic gadgets and they are happy.  Since they are happy, they reason, they must also be free.  A person can maintain such illusions for his entire life.  However, when a large influx of “diversity” makes its way to his own neighborhood, he is confronted with a new reality.  Suddenly, his streets are not so clean anymore.  Graffiti, drug use, prostitution, gangs, loud music and threatening stares infest his once civilized society and he finds it more difficult to convince himself that he is free.  He continues to pay his taxes and yet government is not there to clean up the mess.  He may ask himself, “are not the taxes I pay the fruits of my own labor?  Am I not paying them in vain?  If government is taking my labor, but giving me nothing in return, does this not make me a slave?”  He pays property taxes each month and they are used primarily for public schools – yet his own children are not safe in those public schools.  He has no means of withholding those taxes.  There is no impartial court that will hear him plead that, since he cannot safely send his own children to public schools, he should not have to pay those property taxes.  There is no recourse – because he is a slave.  He is a slave both to government and to the diversity that it has forced upon him.
4]  Not only is the concept of liberal democracy a Western one, but the concept of the primacy of individual liberty is also a Western one.  The ranks of libertarian thinkers, authors and leaders are inhabited almost exclusively by whites.  Of course there are isolated exceptions, but this trend is hard to escape noticing.  Hence, one who is heavily involved in libertarian thought might notice this and start asking himself why this is so.  From such an observation, it is not much of a leap to race realism.
Are there other doctrines that should go hand in hand with libertarianism and race realism?  Most certainly there are.  If you can think of any, feel free to share them with the rest of us!

Posted in libertarian thought, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 10 Comments

Left wing propaganda

Posted on February 28, 2010 by jewamongyou

Leftist propaganda is not only easy to spot, it is also difficult to avoid.  Still, for entertainment purposes, I’ll highlight examples now and then.
This one is from a Portland rag called  “Willamette Week”.  It’s from Sept. 30th, 2009, in an article ironically named “Censored”:
“De facto segregation deepening in public education… Schools segregated by race and poverty tend to have much higher dropout rates, higher teacher turnover, and greater exposure to crime and gangs, placing students at a major disadvantage in society.”
I wonder how many thousands of clueless sheeple read the above article and simply accepted that statement at face value.  According to the above, an influx of black and Hispanic children (into an all white school) will tend to decrease dropout rates, improve teacher retention and reduce crime.  Is this really what we see in real life?  It certainly is not my experience.  In fact, my experience has been the exact opposite.  Since this is a public blog, I warmly welcome any evidence that supports the Willamette’s claims.
Another example, from the same weekly, is from Feb. 24th, 2010 “The China Syndrome”:
“The Oregon Department of Energy has been under scrutiny since legislative staff revealed in 2008 that the program’s costs were far higher than previously announced: BETCs cost $22 million in foregone taxes in 2003-05…”
The underlying assumption here is that government has a right to our money.  This gives it justification to take our money (steal it, if you will) as “taxes”.  Once this principle is established, the leftist takes his logic one step further: stealing less money counts as “cost”.  What if I were a burglar and the boss, at my regular job, demanded that I work extra hours one night – but I objected that those extra hours would “cost” me several hundred dollars because I would not be able to burgle houses during that time?  What kind of response would I get from my boss?
You will find that, as this column grows, most of my examples will be from free publications.  This is because I refuse to support the leftist media with my money.  While at the Amren conference, I was disappointed to see one of the guests with a brand new newspaper (I think it was the Washington Post).  It looked like he had purchased it.  Folks, please do not buy “mainstream” newspapers!  They hate us.  They hate whites and they hate liberty.  We should not be supporting them.

Posted in examples of propaganda | 6 Comments

Diversity in Africa part one

Posted on February 27, 2010 by jewamongyou

Here is an excerpt from a thread I started on an online forum:
Me: An innocent enough question: should the U.S., along with billions in foreign aid, also try to influence African nations to value racial diversity in their schools. If such diversity is a good thing, why should it be denied the Africans?
Them: I don’t feel that we should be spending billions there and I dont think we should tell them how to run their schools. Diversity in africa? How would they go about that? Bus some white kids from south Africa up to Nigeria? I dont think that would work out for them, and I believe they have larger things to consider than the ethnic make up of their class rooms…
Me: You’re right. However, given that our government does send our hard-earned money to Africa and given that our government does believe racial diversity is the greatest possible good, should they not promote it in Africa as they promote it here?
Yes, it’s impractical to import whites and Asians to Africa – but it’s also impractical to import Africans to America for the sake of diversity and yet our government actually does this so, that being the case, should it not be both ways?
Them: Africans are “imported” into the US? The term is immigration. Many people from myriad nations immigrate to the US every year. I suspect the federal government has a quota system in place to evenly balance how many people immigrate from one particular country or region. Your phrasing is patently racist and I find it personally offensive. But I assume that’s what you’re going for. Find another rock and climb under that one then relax and stay a while.
American values and customs should not be imposed on other sovereign nations just because US aid goes there. That would be called “meddling” in foreign affairs, a practice that has not served the US very well in the past nor will it in the future.
Me: Some people, it seems, love to find “racism” everywhere they look. It’s an obsession. Of course I used the word “import” regarding whites and Asians too – but this is perfectly all right in the eyes of one racist poster, as long as it’s not used regarding blacks because THAT would be “racist”.  Typical double standard and blatant for all to see.
Of course the U.S. should not spend taxpayer money overseas. Nor should the U.S. impose its will on other nations. Given the premise, however, that racial diversity is good for schools – should it not be a goal for those who wish to help Africa, to help bestow upon them this blessing? My query is not a complicated one – but obviously it is one that some people don’t like to ponder.
On the one hand, we have true conservatives who reject foreign aid and meddling (as do I) – but this is not my point and perhaps I could have worded it better originally. Then we have leftists who, for some odd reason, believe racial diversity should only be a goal in nations traditionally inhabited by whites or mainly by whites. To them I ask: “if racial diversity is such a good thing, why not help Africa achieve it if we have a goal of helping Africa?”
I’ll spell it out in even simpler terms. Given: Racial diversity is good for education. Given: Many Americans truly wish to help Africa educate her children = Racial diversity would be good for Africa. Next question: why do those who wish to help Africa, and who DO favor foreign aid to Africa, not make it a goal to also bring racial diversity to Africa? It’s a fair question and it deserves a fair answer; not the usual mud slinging and whining about “racism”.
Them: Other than in South Africa, a country that has quite recently (as of 1996) desegregated it’s schools officially but much segregation remains, where is there segregation in other African nations?
Like in South Africa, desegregation is a new concept for the US as a nation. For that reason, it is understandable that many in the country are threatened by it and would use such sarcastic phrases as “help bestow upon them this blessing”.
If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat…
Me: You’ve never heard of “de-facto segregation”? I will not respond to your other inflammatory remarks because you’re trying to change the topic of this thread. If you wish to discuss the specific advantages of racial integration in education vs. disadvantages you should probably start another thread. This one pertains to “black Africa” where the vast majority of schools are 100% black. This is de-facto segregation. Of course it would be difficult to import children/adults of other races to enrich their schools – but certainly not impossible. If it were recognized as a goal, then ways would be found to make it happen. There are plenty of colleges in areas of the U.S. that are almost entirely white and, guess what? They have special programs called “diversity programs” that encourage students of other races and backgrounds to move there and attend their schools. Why is it so unthinkable that African schools do the same? This should not even be a controversial topic. Would you care to explain why you feel threatened/offended by this?
Them: Ah, we finally come to the crux of this odd thread. These “diversity programs” sound wonderful and should be supported and encouraged. Where in the US is this practice occurring? It’s about time that some level of equality is given to groups who have long been oppressed.
Thanks for clarifying.
Them again: First of all some of the ignorance in this forum is astonishing. Africa has millions of different tribal and ethnic groups and the idea of integrating schools so that children of different tribal/ethnic groups live and work and play together is a great one. I can’t claim to be an expert on pan-African local educational policies so I have no idea if this is a widespread practice or if it doesn’t happen anywhere but if it’s not it could go a long way to healing much of the animus these varying groups feel toward one another, just as it has with the desegregation of schools in the States.
Unfortunately this doesn’t seem to be what is being discussed here. What this seems to be is a ridiculous argument that sees people as “black” or “white” and is using the absurd idea of sending white children from who knows where to be educated in Africa to make the idea of desegregated schools in the U.S. seem absurd as well. Poor form friend.
The desegregation of the U.S. education system is one of the truly great things this nation has done. First and for most it taught all successive generations that people are pretty much the same regardless of their skin tone. It has given children of all ethnic backgrounds a chance to grow up together and work together. It has helped to level the playing field that for a long time gave white children a huge advantage as a birthright. And has helped cure much of the systemic racism in our country. Things aren’t perfect but they’re a lot better than the used to be. And, while not everybody takes advantage of the opportunities education affords them, those that do should be blamed for it.
Me: But of course. There is great diversity amongst black Africans and just because they may have similar skin tones does not make them all alike. I’ll even go a step further: There is great diversity amongst white people in the U.S. and the fact that they have similar skin tones does not make them all the same. Nevertheless, it is obvious that any school that is 100% white (regardless of its diversity) is considered to be “lacking in diversity” by the powers that be, by the media, by school administrators and even by the public. So, if diversity of skin color is considered of paramount importance in the U.S., why should it not be considered important in Africa as well?
But you want diversity of “tribes”; groups that differ culturally. American blacks are, culturally, more American than anything else. I would venture to say that a Polish immigrant represents far more cultural diversity, in an American school, than a homegrown black. And yet in the eyes of The Law, that Polish immigrant doesn’t count as “diversity” – because he is white. Take 500 Polish immigrants and import them into a school in America that has a total of 1000 students and guess what? That school is still considered “lacking diversity”. The powers that be will wring their hands and agonize over this and they will do anything in their power to change it.
I’ll pose a question to you: can you cite one example where U.S. law recognized the presence of whites, amongst other whites, as “diversity” in regards to nationality/ethnicity? Has the presence of Jewish kids (for example) ever exempted a school from forced busing? Jews do have a distinct culture and a history of oppression in this country. Has the U.S. government ever recognized the presence of Jews, in a school, as “diversity” for its purposes?
At this point, I was banned.

Posted in pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 4 Comments

Is it racism or anger and resentment?

Posted on February 26, 2010 by jewamongyou

It is normal for members of oppressed groups (even if they only perceive themselves as being oppressed) to deride their oppressors.  Thus, if a native American tribe, that had just been dispossessed of its land and suffered massacres at the hands of whites, referred to whites in derogatory ways few would blame them for it.   Could we accurately describe such native Americans as “racist”?  I don’t think so; they are only venting their spleens.  Since, in this scenario, the difference between the oppressed and the victims is primarily racial, race is the attribute that a native American would latch onto for his verbal arrows.
Society at large is blissfully ignorant of the crimes committed against whites, both as a race and as individuals.  The mainstream media, government, schools and the business world conspire to keep them oblivious to the horrors that race realists and white nationalists are painfully aware of.  Race realists bear the burden of knowledge and this knowledge leads to anger.  Sometimes it leads to hatred.  I believe that anger is justified and constructive.  It leads to activism and the education of others.  Hatred, on the other hand, is more like a temper tantrum; it is destructive and counterproductive*.  I believe that anybody who is aware of racial truths and dynamics must feel angry.  If not, then something is wrong with that person.
An angry person will sometimes vent his spleen.  In the throws of his anger, he might sometimes use crude terms, exaggerate or fling insults at those who oppose him.  While I cannot say that such behavior is always justified, I can certainly make the case that such behavior is excusable on occasion.   I do not believe that such outbursts, in and of themselves, make a person a racist.
Take the case of Craig Bodeker, creator of the excellent video “A Conversation About Race“.  While feebly trying to attack him, the SPLC (which truly is a hate group) cites some invectives that Bodeker let fly within the framework of a heated youtube exchange.  Bodeker retorts:
“Have any readers ever been to the comments section on Youtube? Does anyone NOT KNOW what a mosh-pitt of “free expression” it is? There are, sometimes, actual screaming matches, even though they’re conducted in written form. Sometimes people say harsh, mean things there, in that last remaining refuge of Free Speech. Am I to assume that the SPLS’s Sonia Scherr has never made a sarcastic comment? Or even a distasteful one? Or that anyone who EVER has should be stereotyped, marginalized and disenfranchised? This seems to be what the SPLC suggests. . . .”
The above accusation, by the SPLC, illustrates how race-realists are expected to be more than human.  I’m wondering if Sonia Scherr is married or has a boyfriend.  If so, I’m wondering if they’ve ever gotten into a spat.  What might have been said during such a spat?  Would it be fair to record every word, said in anger, and regurgitate it each time we wish to pass judgment upon Mrs. Scherr?  Well I’ve got news for the goons at SPLC:  we race-realists are real people with real feelings and we’re really angry and, by God, we’ll express our anger using whatever colorful language suits our fancy.
*Here, I’m speaking of blanket hatred toward particular groups, not hatred of that which is evil.

Posted in politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | Leave a comment