I haven’t been posting much, partly because I’ve been expressing my thoughts on Quora and Twitter, partly because I’m enjoying my non-virtual (IE. RL) life in the tropics, and partly because my blog readership has dwindled to close to zero. Hardly anybody reads it anymore – but that’s okay; I use it as a tool for other platforms.
Here’s a comment I just posted on Quora, and it’s a thought that’s been percolating in my mind for a long time:
We could even say that Cultural-Marxism is a subversion of authentic Marxism.
Marxism was originally intended to advocate for the proletariat, protected it from the bourgeoise and transferring power from the latter to the former.
Cultural-Marxism uses race as a cudgel, by the bourgeoise, to further persecute the (White) proletariat. For centuries, the proletariat has suffered at the hands of the noble class and the bourgeoise. Now, as a final indignity, the bourgeoise is replacing the White proletariat with foreigners – and brainwashing proletariat youth into hating themselves as “racists.”
Here we see legacy media policy in action: White attacks black? Report it as a White-on-black assault. Black attacks White? Don’t mention race, and try to hide it if possible.
What about the White-on-black attack? If we read the article, we see that it shouldn’t even qualify as news, let alone an atrocity:
For two ladies, it led to a situation in Walmart that got out of hand. After going into the store and doing their shopping, these women got into it with each other in the checkout line. A kicking situation led to one of the women successfully defending herself.
That’s it. There are no more details on this story, and nothing to back up the headline’s claim that the black woman was attacked – the implication being that it was unprovoked. For all we know, the black woman was jumping the line, and the White woman fought back. This led to a minor scuffle.
I don’t think it’s at all necessary to have a computer to generate and enhance racism.
I do think however as I see my grandkids and other young people that times are changing. That does not convince me that there will not be continued brutal inequality- but it just may come from a different source- than say color.
Here is a photo of my Granddaughter on her first day of Kindergarten-
That day the teacher told them to draw a photo of themselves as a Super Hero-
How many times have we heard this, in response to the proclamation “It’s Okay to be White?” More times than I can count…
… but a Rasmussen Poll says almost half of black respondents believe, in fact, that it’s NOT okay to be White when asked the question.
Here’s Dilbert creator Scott Adams sharing his feelings on the matter:
Dilbert creator Scott Adams says that Rasmussen poll showing high level of Black racial animosity against Whites is the first opinion poll that has ever caused him to change his behavior pic.twitter.com/7UrLJxDAZA
To a reasonable person, nothing Adams says should be controversial.
How many WHITE respondents believe it’s not okay to be White? I haven’t paid Rasmussen’s membership fee, and I haven’t seen the results elsewhere, but I’m going to guess that 20-30% of Whites also believe it’s not okay to be White.
We should stay away from those Whites people too, as much as possible… however, it’s obvious that we’re much more likely to be the target of racial violence from a black racist than a White one.
As for me, being in the Dominican Republic and all, I’d lead a painfully lonely existence if I avoided black people. If the survey were taken here, I’d say that close to 0% of Dominicans (of any race) would respond that it’s not okay to be White.
Most of y’all are already familiar with the Biden video clip, where he promotes The Great Replacement. I’ve posted it before, but here it is again, all 60 seconds of it:
The Snopes article, not surprisingly, categorizes this claim as “false.” If you read it critically, you’ll recognize it as a convoluted piece of thinly-disguised propaganda.
The MSN version of the article, which I linked to above, doesn’t include the video at all – but the original Snopes article does. I pointed out that the video is 60 seconds long. The version that Snopes chose to use, however, is only 45 seconds long:
I don’t know why TrumpGirlOnFire chose to use this truncated version of the video, but I DO KNOW why Snopes selected it: It leaves out the part where Biden says this demographic shift is “something we can be most proud of.”
How convenient for Snopes.
The Snopes article goes on to say:
Such posts actively misrepresented what Biden actually said in 2015. First, he was referencing white Americans of European descent, specifically.
… which makes no sense at all, because that’s the whole point. White-advocates aren’t worried about Iranians or Afghans; they’re worried about European Whites being replaced. The fact that Biden was referring to European Whites makes it even worse. For the life of me, I can’t figure out what point Snopes is trying to make here. Leftists, can you please explain this to us?
Next, the article states:
Further, he was not promoting an active agenda of replacing that group or other “white Americans” with immigrants of color, and no other evidence shows that he has acted on, or supported, such policies to make that happen.
It’s obvious from the video, even the truncated version, that Biden considers the demographic decline of Whites to be a good thing. Biden has been part of the US government, in Congress, as vice-president and now as president, since 1973. That’s 50 years in politics.
Is Snopes actually claiming that in all those 50 years, Biden never did anything to promote a process that he considers “a good thing,” and “something to be proud of?” If so, what kind of person would that make him?
What kind of individual serves in the government for 50 years and does nothing to promote an idea he firmly supports? A process he specifically says “we can be proud of?”
If we had any doubts before, they are now dispelled: Snopes is nothing but a shameless tool of far-left propaganda.
This is a complex issue, but for the purposes of this short post, I’ll use the metrics of establishment environmentalist entities, such as the US government. I’ll use tonnage of emissions, with the understanding that some may disagree, and that there are many other possible angles to this issue. Tonnage of emissions is, at least in theory, quantifiable.
EnergyStar is a government program that gives certification to various products that they’re energy-efficient. You may have noticed the emblem on some of your appliances. From the government website:
ENERGY STAR is an important tool in fighting climate change, improving air quality, and protecting public health. By reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants, ENERGY STAR also provides states and local governments with more flexibility and reduced costs towards meeting their climate, air quality, and public health goals. In 2020 alone, ENERGY STAR and its partners helped Americans save more than 520 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and avoid $42 billion in energy costs. These savings resulted in associated emission reductions of more than 400 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, roughly equivalent to more than five percent of U.S. total greenhouse gas emissions.
400 million metric tons per year is a lot of emissions. Very impressive!
The U.S. foreign-born population reached a record 44.8 million in 2018. Since 1965, when U.S. immigration laws replaced a national quota system, the number of immigrants living in the U.S. has more than quadrupled. Immigrants today account for 13.7% of the U.S. population, nearly triple the share (4.8%) in 1970.
According to MigrationPolicy.org, immigrants have been responsible for approximately 20 million extra births in the United States since 1990. Ignoring births to immigrants from before 1990, we can conservatively estimate that immigration is responsible for an additional 65 million Americans in recent decades.
The bulk of these immigrants came from Latin America, specifically Mexico. More recently, they come from Asia. From Pew Research (ibid.):
Worldpopulationreview has a handy interactive map that shows us, among other things, the per-capita emissions for most countries in the world. According to this map, Mexico has a per-capita emission of 3. China is 8, India is 2. Philippines and El Salvador are both 1. To reach a fairly precise value, we’d have to extrapolate the figures in the above table, and then combine the respective per-capita emissions. I’ll leave this for somebody who’s better at math than I am – but the resulting average won’t be far off from 3. Probably slightly less. We’ll call it 3.
For the United States, the per-capita emission is almost 13 – yielding a difference of about 11.
65 million times 11 is 715 million extra metric tons of emissions due to immigration in recent decades.
Though official sources don’t necessarily agree, I think that an increasing amount of immigration will come from black Africa, where carbon emissions hover around 0-1. In other words, every African immigrant will increase emissions by around 12 metric tons annually.
The amount of excess emissions, from immigration, is almost TWICE AS MUCH as what is prevented through EnergyStar.
If EnergyStar is “an important tool in fighting climate change,” as the US government claims, then how much more so would be stopping immigration.
Update: Somebody did a similar calculation from a British perspective:
This Black History Month, celebrate the rich history of Black-owned businesses. Discover nearby Black-owned restaurants that are popular in San Francisco, from casual sit-down dining to dessert delights.
Search Black-owned
Black-owned Ones to Watch in 2023Around the country, people are discovering more Black-owned businesses in their communities. Check out the Black-owned Ones to Watch in 2023 to stay current.See Ones to Watch
Order from Black-owned businesses anywhere in the U.S.In honor of Black History Month, we’re highlighting Black-owned businesses that will ship to customers no matter where they live. Check out this list of businesses to place your order.Check out the list
At this point, it’s not even a case of such and such company turns woke/anti-White. This is now so much the norm that it would be newsworthy if any company did NOT fall in line.
As we see this status-quo unfolding before our very eyes, to the point where it’s undeniable, let’s remember that these same companies claim that blacks are an “oppressed minority,” suffering from “systemic racism.”
Sorry Corporate America, you can’t have it both ways. Either every one of you supports black businesses or blacks are oppressed. Both can’t be true.
I came across this recently, and thought I’d share it with my readers. I don’t know what the story is behind this, but it does illustrate the third-world mentality: Religiosity without necessarily having consideration for others. Note the sticker on the driver side window.
