Many of the states going bankrupt will be forced to do something about the results of years of liberal Democrat rule. Something like the following: CBS News reports: “Michigan lawmakers are on the verge of approving a bill that would enable the governor to appoint emergency managers — officials with unilateral power to make sweeping changes to cities facing financial troubles. Under the legislation, the Michigan Messenger reports, the governor could declare a financial emergency in towns or school districts. He could then appoint a manager to fire local elected officials, break contracts, seize and sell assets, eliminate services – and even eliminate whole cities or school districts without any public input. The measure passed in the state Senate this week; the House passed its own version earlier. The two versions of the bill are expected to be reconciled next week, and Republican Gov. Rick Snyder has said he will sign the bill the bill into law. Democrats and their allies are decrying the legislation as a power grab and say it’s part of a wider effort taking place in several states, such as Wisconsin, to weaken labor unions.”
This is a direct result of labor unions driving cities and states to the brink of bankruptcy and Democrats preventing the deportation of illegal aliens, who cost the states a fortune in government services like public education.
More CBS: ” ‘It takes every decision in a city or school district and puts it in the hands of the manager, from when the streets get plowed to who plows them and how much they are paid,’ said Mark Gaffney, president of the Michigan State AFL-CIO. ‘This is a takeover by the right wing and it’s an assault on democracy like I’ve never seen.’ ”
In other words, the Democrats are upset that crooked politicians might not be able to give city contracts to their brother-in-law at some exorbitant cost to taxpayers in the future.
In regards to a “takeover by the right wing” –that sounds exactly like what this country has needed for decades.
In my prior article I made reference to the “…religious nature of the Secular Humanism…” that fuels the emotional fervor of the disparate social elements that one might broadly classify as the Left. This is actually a misuse of the term and I should begin this article by correcting myself and acknowledging that I am referring instead to the pastiche of incongruent ideological, moral, cultural, and political elements that should more rightly be defined as Egalitarianism. I posit—and I am not the first to do so— that Egalitarianism is indeed the regnant religion of this era. It is important to grasp that it is, indeed, a religion in order to best understand it and its followers; to comprehend the danger inherent in it; to possibly identify any weaknesses that may be exploited; and to predict its progression through the organic and finite life of such belief systems. I shall begin by establishing the case that Egalitarianism is, indeed, the state religion for the West.
What is Egalitarianism? There is no use in trying to define it as some cogent and definable set of beliefs. It is rather a tumor in the mind of the collective body of Western man, diffuse at the extremities and interconnected with an infinite number of outlying elements—some of which, ironically enough, are actually shared with various elements of Rightist thought. However, the center of the tumor is thick with notions of the overarching equality of men, the outright rejection of even the possibility of natural differences between human populations, convictions of the inherent evil of Whites and especially of white men, sentiments of the moral superiority of colored races and of women, support for the uses of state power to correct inequality wherever it may be found—as its presence can only be the result of the abuses of appropriately colored or sexually oriented groups by the aforementioned white, heterosexual men, conviction in the unquestionable good of “freedom” and “democracy,” the importance of tolerance and cultural relativism, and lastly, the firm belief in Progress and the perfectibility of the temporal world. The logical incongruities obvious to even the casual reader between most of these notions—e.g. the idea that all races can at once be completely equal, while at the same time, Whites can be more evil than the others—do not hinder the true believer in the least. Indeed, the faith in these principles; regardless of their inability to coexist in a coherent philosophy, is one of the first indicators of the religious nature of this system of beliefs.
To a significant extent these beliefs—most particularly the notions of the unquestionable equality of man and of the original sin (of the White man in this case)—are ironically inherited from the Christian religion that is to no small degree despised by the modern, secular Egalitarian. It could in fairness be said that modern, secular Egalitarianism is in fact the transmogrification of Christianity into a religion that is now true to its theoretical principles to an extreme degree but that is now paradoxically devoid of its deity in the supernatural sense, the male God-figure having been killed off. What has replaced Him within the context of the religion in question is not entirely clear to me. But certainly one can identify Christ-figures such as the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and elements of religious taboo.
Regarding the former, note that the dear reverend is the only man for whom a National Holiday exists in the United States. And this at a time when Easter (the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) and Christmas (His birth) are themselves becoming completely devoid of acceptable, public religious meaning. With regard to Easter—ostensibly the most important Christian Holiday period—this process is essentially complete. With regard to Christmas, the process has reached such a level of maturity that in many cities of the United States, references to the Tannenbaum as a “Christmas tree” are considered gauche. Anyone who still doubts whether Christianity has been replaced as the State religion of the West need only ask himself one question: Is it more socially acceptable in today’s polite society to be a Satan worshipper or a racist? Marilyn Manson does an entertaining job of pretending to be the former. It would be interesting to see how many albums he would be allowed to sell if he pretended to be the latter.
An excellent example of Egalitarian religious taboo is the use of the word “nigger.” Today, even writing the word in its entirety is largely unacceptable in polite company. To use the word within any context, in written or verbal form, is almost wholly circumscribed for anyone except Blacks. Instead, conventional mores demand that non-Blacks only obliquely refer to it by writing “the n-word”, “n****r”, etc. Even in these cases, it cannot be used in reference to anything but rather, only used as a subject of a sentence (that must universally condemn the use of the n-word). The search for a comparable example in human history of a word that could not be written or spoken produces only two examples that I am aware of: The first being the Hebraic notion that direct reference to God (rather “G-D” or “Y-W-H”) was blasphemous. The second being the bourgeois sensibility to language deemed vulgar, base, and overly sexual (pregnant with late Christian moral repressiveness). The former is only held true by religious Jews today. The latter has completely fallen out of practice, with the possible exception of television programming for infants. Instead we see a complete replacement of the list of “unacceptable” words, which is a prime illustration of the collapse and disempowerment of the White, Protestant bourgeois who dominated the Anglosphere until the 1950s and the subsequent ascendance of the new, morally-empowered overclass, who now see fit to create their own list of vulgar terms, complete with their own pseudo-religious, moral justifications. That terms like “nigger” were used broadly in society up until very recently and overwhelmingly without ill intent or effect is irrelevant to the architects of modern, egalitarian moral constructs.
At this point it is useful to address the nature of Egalitarianism as the State religion of the West. Here one might be ascribing too much power to the State—or rather, suggesting simplistically that the State: the supreme public power of a political entity, is indeed the primary power in the West. It would be more accurate to argue that the State in the various “democracies” of the West is in reality an executive body, carrying out the wishes of the true, private and corporate powers that use the convenient illusions of public consent offered by universal suffrage as a foil. So let us modify the implication here and suggest that Egalitarianism is the religion imposed via the State and other, opinion-forming and population-controlling entities upon the people of the West; as yet another instrument in furthering the dissolution of the “European” West. Regardless, for the true believers in this religion and for the remainder of the populace who live under its moral force, the difference is irrelevant.
This leads to another interesting subject, which illustrates Egalitarianism’s religious nature: the attitude of the new priestly class and the true believers with regard to heretics. For a belief system for which tolerance is a highest virtue, there is remarkably little tolerance for views outside its narrow, but chaotic and unpredictable, purview. One can acknowledge simply that this intolerance is indeed a manifestation of religiosity—specifically the religiosity of Semitic monotheism as embodied in Judaism, Christianity, Islam—and its polar interpretation of the world, divided into black and white, good and evil, and nothing in between. However, it is also of use to examine some specific aspects of the particular intolerance of Egalitarianism, because unlike the aforementioned Semitic religions, which were religions that marked or accompanied the ascendance of civilizations, Egalitarianism is a religion of descent. Not for the architects of the religion—but for its priests and true believers. Of course, they do not believe it to be the late religion of Spenglerian theory. Rather, they believe it to be the final religion at the end of history—leading to the ascent to earthly utopia. The religion that shows the way to the perfected, temporal human condition: the absence of poverty, suffering, and unhappiness for all people on Earth.
The shrill, inchoate hatred that infuses the attitude of the priests and true believers of Egalitarianism toward non-believers is a manifestation of the absolute incompatibility between these beliefs and the state of the world as it is. Egalitarian belief is indeed the belief in inconsistent ideals that not only conflict with one another, but that conflict with all empirical evidence before one’s eyes and all human instinct. Egalitarianism is a fragile, cracked and shifting skin of ice covering a turbulent, madly-rushing river of cold fact beneath it. It is only through passion and frenzied conviction that this cognitive dissonance can be mastered. Anyone who threatens this tender balance is to be hated. It is akin to the teenager who reacts in an overly angry and passionate manner to gentle criticisms of his father. The teenager’s belief system, still in its infancy, is easily threatened by the wisdom of the father. The child therefore prefers to avoid the discussion altogether; lest his unformed ideas come to humiliation in the debate.
The irrational reaction of the Egalitarian can be better understood when one considers what is at stake. The Egalitarian has committed his entire culture and civilization to a gamble. Every previous example in all of human history suggests very clearly how this gamble will pay out. The Egalitarian believes it will be different this time. He feels it will be different this time. It will be different this time because he believes it and feels it, and because he knows that if everyone works together to make it different, it can be. But there are some out there who are doubters. There are some out there who think it won’t be different this time… gun-owners, opponents of immigration, survivalists, etc. There are some out there whose lack of conviction and lack of optimism are in and of themselves the seeds of failure. This is why they must be hated. This is why they must be silenced. This is why—as examples from Egalitarian paradises clearly illustrate—they must often be killed.
One day, years ago, it suddenly struck me that the corporate mainstream media seemed rather obsessed with racism. It may seem strange to say this now and here, given that the obsession with racism is so blatantly obvious. But it must be remembered that to people who do not visit websites like this one, the racism-obsessed discourse of the anti-racists who run the media is nowadays so pervasive and ubiquitous, and has been so thoroughly legitimated, normalised, and mystified by establishment institutional platforms, that the pathological abnormality of it has become invisible for the average citizen. This is a phenomenon associated with what Marxists refer to as “false consciousness”, awareness of which often necessitates an event traumatic enough to trigger a re-evaluation by the individual of his accepted reality.
For years I marvelled at how one could not switch on the radio, open a newspaper, or watch a factual television programme without the words “race”, “racism”, or “racist” being mentioned at least once. When one thinks about it, and tries to imagine oneself an observer visiting from another world or another epoch, one cannot help but see the West as gripped by some form of dementia.
Last Summer I decided to quantify the matter, and set up a Google Alert with the terms “racist” and “racism”. From that day forward, I was daily bombarded with links to news articles mentioning either or both of those terms.
On average, Google offered me 35-40 news items, each more ridiculous than the next, with which to treat myself to bout of anger, if I so desired.
During the last couple of months, however, I noticed a sudden drop in the anti-racists’ output: suddenly, the news items were down to single digits.
After collating the data earlier today, this is what I found:
It seems that the decline began on day 120, in mid November. The downward trend was broken by two rallies: one peaking on the second week of December and another around mid January. On 21 January output collapsed, and news items mentioning “racist” or “racism” have only occasionally risen above 9.
What happened?
Has the mainstream media grown bored with racism?
Or did Google change their algorithm?
Google Trends reveals an increase in news items containing the word “racism”. Indeed, the upward trend begins in the final month of 2007, enjoying three huge spikes between April 2009 and July 2010.
Interestingly, however, searches for the term “racism” peaked in the first quarter of 2005 and have steadily declined since.
More interestingly still, if we use the Google Trends data, it seems that the decline in Google searches for the term “racism” coincides with a rise in news coverage of incidents involving racism.
We often hear from the media that racism is on the increase; we have, in fact, been hearing it for years, so (if we are to believe the reports) it must have been constantly increasing throughout those years. Yet, irrespective of whether there has been an increase or a decrease in related news items, it seems internet surfers are progressively becoming less interested in reading about it.
Is it because the internet-surfing citizen has become better educated, thanks to the efforts by the media, and better knows where to read about racism when he is so inclined; or is it because said citizen has had it up to his ears with the endless talk about racism, and the never-ending exploration and discovery of its hidden, ever-expanding, and constantly mutating forms?
Black men are at least nine times more likely to commit femicide than white men. In fact, the figure seems to go up when black men are involved in interracial relationships. A huge study on femicide in the United States found that white women married to black men were 12.4 times more likely to be murdered by their spouse than white women married to white men.
A PROMISING Tasmanian model and university student fought to fend off her ex-boyfriend before he fatally stabbed her and took his own life.
Police believe Sammi Hewitt, 24, and Kuol Piom, 29, had been arguing over the weekend about the status of their long-term relationship.
The disagreement turned violent when Ms Hewitt, who was a student at the University of Tasmania, Australia, visited Mr Piom at his rented home in Hobart on Monday.
In response to my column last week about hormesis — the theory that some radiation can be beneficial to humans — liberals reacted with their usual open-minded examination of the facts.
According to Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters, MSNBC’s Ed Schultz devoted an entire segment to denouncing me. He called me toxic, accused me of spreading misinformation and said I didn’t care about science.
One thing Schultz did not do, however, was cite a single physicist or scientific study.
I cited three physicists by name as well as four studies supporting hormesis in my column. For the benefit of liberals scared of science, I even cited The New York Times.
It tells you something that the most powerful repudiation of hormesis Schultz could produce was the fact that a series of government agencies have concluded — I quote — that “insufficient human data on hormesis exists.”
Well, in that case, I take it all ba -– wait, no. That contradicts nothing I said in my column.
Liberals should take up their quarrel with the physicists cited by both me and the Times. I’m sure the Harvard physics department will be fascinated to discover that the left’s idea of the scientific method is to cling to their fears while hurling invective at anyone who proposes a novel thesis.
The fact that liberals are so terrified of science that they chronically wet themselves wouldn’t be half as annoying if they didn’t go around boasting about their deep respect for science, especially compared to conservatives.
Second Life: Where the justification for “White Flight” is explicit
We have finally realized that “white flight” isn’t something that Black people like. Sure, Black people get control over the city where white people no longer desire to live, but a few years into Black rule that city inevitably collapses under the colossal weight of Black inertia.
Just as the sun rises, Black people will follow the “white flight” wherever it travels and, inexorably, “white flight” will transpire again in a vain attempt to flee the problems caused by our greatest strength. Cheap land outside major cities and cheap gasoline made the short-term strategy a smart, quick investment for the betterment of ones family, though the long-term ramifications of fleeing major metropolitan areas should be obvious.
The first suburbs that popped-up around major cities were once pristine, but all succumb to the “Black Undertow” effect. Just look at Atlanta’s suburbs for an example of this, as “white flight” and the subsequent “Black Undertow” effect has left Clayton County, DeKalb County, and – soon – Fayette County as undesirable locations to raise a family.
A thriving city can survive with a population that is less than 10 percent Black. Once it goes over 10 percent Black however, “white flight” is going to occur soon and the “Black Undertow” will enable a slow metamorphosis completely changing that once thriving city into… a small-scale version of Detroit.
The South by Southwest® (SXSW®) Conferences & Festivals offer the unique convergence of original music, independent films, and emerging technologies. Fostering creative and professional growth alike, SXSW is the premier destination for discovery.
It’s basically an attempt at replicating the exclusive TED Conference for white hipsters unlucky enough to be invited to that conference.
At the SXSW conference in Austin, a panel discussion dealt with racism in online gaming. In the real world, “white flight” from deteriorating cities and counties (consult the “Black Undertow” effect) transpires just as frequently as people living in the virtual world of online gaming enjoy a computerized world free of Black people:
At the SXSW conference in Austin, Texas (March 11-20), the intersection of online identity and racism was explored in a panel called “E-Race: Avatars, Anonymity and the Virtualization of Identity.” Jeff Yang, who writes the “Asian Pop” column for the San Francisco Chronicle, organized and opened the panel, remarking that we are at the dawn of a new era.
Racial identity is becoming more malleable than ever before, as mixed-race and minority populations are steadily increasing and changing the American demographic. At the same time, our online selves are becoming larger reflections of who we are in the real world — but why is that occurring? Yang asked Wagner James Au — an expert on the virtual avatar community Second Life, and the pioneer of digital racial studies — and Lisa Nakamura, a professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, to reflect on the changing nature of online racial identity.
The panel set out to explore a key theme: “What does the ability to hide or disguise identity mean in particular for the experience of race — and racism — online?” Counter to common assumptions, the ability to camouflage one’s race online doesn’t equal liberation from racism. In fact, since the default person online is assumed to be white and male, revealing yourself to be racially different often prompts other users to lash out.
Jenny McCarthy, Yes; Serena Williams, No
Au, the author of the blog New World Notes, said that in Second Life, “you can design your stereotypes from the bottom up.” Users select every part of their bodies — from hair, skin and eye color to lip shape and shade. However, with that selection comes a heavy serving of assumptions and stereotypes…
Au also noted that many African-American Second Life players often practice virtual skin lightening. While many Second Life players have the ability to look completely like or unlike their real-world selves, many black players find the racism and discrimination too much to deal with in both the online and offline worlds. Therefore, these players try to strike a color compromise: Au explained that some African-American users will choose a skin that looks more “Latino” — still identifiably brown, but lighter-skinned — in an attempt to lessen the discrimination.
Nakamura repeatedly framed the cost of racism online in terms of how it harms those who attempt to participate. She brought up the example of how Quinton Jackson, a mixed martial arts fighter in real life who quit playing the game Halo 2 online because of the excessive racist chatter over the game’s voice channels, which players use to talk to one another. She talked about how users are discouraged from choosing darker avatars by game companies (who rarely create more than one or two darker-skinned avatars from which to choose) as well as other players (some of whom use the anonymity of the Internet to indulge their inner racist).
Nakamura points out, “Race doesn’t happen because of biology; it happens because of culture.” Race (and racism) is something that develops when our culture rewards the persecution of a smaller group. Unfortunately, it seems that as our lives move more and more into the digital world, we are migrating more and more of the racism in our culture along with us.
Sorry Nakamura, race does happen because of biology. Black women cannot give birth to a white or Asian individual. And Lord help the intrepid Black person who dares practice cultural shunning (thereby racial shaming) through “Acting White.”
The virtual world of online gaming offers an explicit example of a real-world where implicit thought dictates white people’s actions, most notably “white flight.”
It would seem that in the virtual world where anonymity allows a freedom that the real-world can’t replicate, the one common unifier among online gaming enthusiasts is their disdain for Black people.
“White flight” into a virtual reality where implicit thoughts are given an explicit platform is a hilarious reminder of the primary motivation for what drives white people to flee the “Brown Undertow” in the first place.
In a scholarly study of video game characters, The virtual census: representations of gender, race and age in video games it becomes obvious that the gaming population prefers to play with characters of white variety:
When primary roles are considered, all groups appear less often except for whites, who appear more often than overall. White characters account for 84.95 percent of all primary characters, black 9.67 percent, biracial 3.69 percent and Asian 1.69 percent. Hispanics and Native Americans did not appear as a primary character in any game, they existed solely as secondary characters.
“White flight” through traversing the virtual world of online gaming thanks to anonymous avatar representation allows an ominous looking glass into the true motivation for “white flight” in the real world.
A reprieve from reality is what the Internet truly offers, a realm where unfettered criticism of Black Run America (BRA) is found in almost every corner.
The past converging with the present: an eternal parade that induces white guilt
We have finally reached a breaking at SBPDL. In a mad rush to edit A Black Nordic God in Thor? and have it ready in time for the May release of Thor, a number of stories of pressing importance have been neglected.
That cops in Miami are plagued with a plethora of Black criminals that warrant shooting (isn’t this problem in New Orleans too?) yet haven’t located a sufficient amount of white criminals to discharge their weapons is somehow a Civil Rights problem:
A few weeks later, a Miami police officer shot and killed a black man during a traffic stop at North Miami Avenue and 75th Street in the Little Haiti neighborhood. The man, Travis McNeil, 28, was unarmed and never left the driver’s seat of his rental car when he was shot once in the chest, members of his family said.
Mr. McNeil was the seventh African-American man to be shot and killed by Miami police officers in eight months. The shootings in this racially polarized city have led to marches on the Police Department’s headquarters and calls for a Justice Department investigation, and the city manager has initiated an investigation into the chief’s record.
After pushing for action for weeks, the families of the seven shooting victims will speak at a City Commission meeting on Thursday. Some families are demanding that Chief Exposito be dismissed.
“I don’t understand how the powers that be can allow these things to keep happening,” Sheila McNeil, the mother of Mr. McNeil, said of the Feb. 10 shooting death of her son. “Something is drastically wrong.”
Black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime and they have a tendency to not cooperate with police. This is a recipe for disaster. That white people in Miami (are there any left?) fail to become casualties by the bullets of police is the real story here.
In Black Run America (BRA) the sins of the past are far greater than the sins of today. That police once brutalized Black people is grounds for the continued myth that permeates through the entire Black community that all police prey upon the Black community with impunity.
In reality, police try and protect law-abiding Black citizens from a large criminal presence in their midst that preys upon them, but Black people see an attack on one as an attack on all.
BRA must live in the past, constantly pulling up stories (of dubious merit) in an attempt to psychological defeat white people by instilling vast amounts of guilt upon their already overburdened souls. This story out of Alabama is a perfect example of this tactic:
Nearly 70 years after Recy Taylor was raped by a gang of white men, leaders of the rural southeast Alabama community where it happened apologized Monday, acknowledging that her attackers escaped prosecution because of racism and an investigation bungled by police.
“It is apparent that the system failed you in 1944,” Henry County probate judge and commission chairwoman JoAnn Smith told several of Taylor’s relatives at a news conference at the county courthouse.
Taylor, 91, lives in Florida and did not attend the news conference. Family members said she was in poor health and was not up to traveling to Abbeville or speaking with reporters. But her 74-year-old brother Robert Corbitt, who still lives in town, was front and center and said he would relay the apology to his sister.
“What happened to my sister way back then … couldn’t happen today,” he said. “Boy, what a mess they made out of it. They tried to make her look like a whore and she was a Christian lady.”
Taylor, who is black, told The Associated Press in an interview last year that she believes the men who attacked her are dead, but she would still like an apology from the state. The AP does not typically identify victims of sexual assault but is using her name because she has publicly identified herself.
Following Taylor’s logic, do the thousands of white victims of Black rape that occurred last year deserve an apology from the state? The statistics on interracial rape are mind-boggling and so one-sided that a story 70-years-old had to be dragged out of retirement in a bid to pile on the white guilt.
Worse is the continued reliance on the myth of lynching to browbeat white people into submission. Take this story from Diversityinc.com:
The migration of Blacks from the American South to the North is “the greatest untold story of the 20th century,” Pulitzer Prize–winning author Isabel Wilkerson said to an audience of CEOs and senior executives at DiversityInc’s event in Washington, D.C.
Her book, “The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America’s Great Migration,” is about Blacks’ emigration from the South between 1915 and 1970 to escape a “mercurial” caste system of color that threatened violence daily. “An African American was lynched every four days,” Wilkerson said. “That was the price of maintaining the caste system.”
Wilkerson talked about how the migration of Blacks was much like the migration of Europeans, Asians and Latinos to the U.S. — the journey was about freedom to express and to build on their talents.
Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Milwaukee and other Northern cities are poignant reminders and examples of that “great migration’s” legacy and, more importantly, Black people building on their talent. Just look at the state of Detroit before their arrival and after the exodus of whites from that city.
Talent indeed! Black people are fleeing a city they ruined in search of white suburbs to bring their talents to that popped up around Detroit once white people fled.
Their track record for making once-world class cities — like Detroit — and turning them into, well, the Detroit of today is widely known. That Black people now move to suburbs in the South is sad reminder that the fate of Clayton County will soon befall many other once prosperous counties in the South.
But Wilkerson’s claim of “a Black person lynched every four days” must not go unchallenged. Dwight Murphey explained the reality of lynching’s in a monograph he published that we must now cite to refute the pathetic scholarship of Pulitzer Prize-winning Wilkerson, who only won because her work buttresses the system of oppression known as BRA:
Robert L. Zangrando cites figures for the much longer period of 1882-1968 in his book The NAACP Crusade Against Lynching, 1909-1950. Again, his statistics, which he reports were given to him by the Tuskegee Institute, differ somewhat from the other two lists where they overlap. His total figure for 1890, say, is 96, with 11 being white and 85 black. The NAACP’s report of 91 was based on 3 whites and 88 blacks. So we again have reason to take the specifics with caution. Just the same, the order of magnitude is indicated by his 87-year total of 4,742, of which 1,297 were white and 3,445 black. Of equal significance is the declining numbers shown over the years: prior to 1902, there was only one year (1890) with less than 100; prior to 1923, only one year ((1917) with less than 50; prior to 1932, no years with less than 10.
But after a brief increase in 1933, 1934 and 1935, there were always less than ten, and the list dwindles slowly to zero. In effect, lynching ceased to be a major phenomenon by the turn of the century, and had pretty much come to an end by the mid-1930s. If, too, it were seen on a per capita basis in light of total population, the decline would be even more dramatic. (The population of the United States doubled from 30 million in 1860 to 60 million in 1890.) The decline came first in the West and Northeast, and soon thereafter in the South.
As we noted in an article on crime decreasing though unemployment was rising, Black crime has remained a pernicious problem in America for well over a century. Let’s continue further into our exploration of lynching:
In Lynching – History and Analysis (1995) Wichita State University professor Dwight Murphey refutes the case that lynchings were largely a result white of racism. People often resorted to lynching because the authorities were a long ride away, and President Andrew Jackson himself sanctioned the practice when he recommended to Iowa settlers that they lynch murderers. Likewise in Kansas, a New York Tribune correspondent reported in 1858 that “[t]here is a very general disposition to pass over the hopelessly useless forms of Territorial law and corrupt Federal courts, and try these parties (i.e. horse-thieves) by Lynch law.”
Prof. Murphey notes that contrary to current assumptions, blacks also formed lynch gangs, mostly to lynch blacks, but sometimes to lynch whites. In Clarksdale, Tennessee, blacks lynched a white in 1914 for raping a black woman. The authorities later ruled that this was justifiable homicide. In 1872 in Chicot County, Arkansas, armed blacks broke three whites out of jail and shot them to death.
Nor was lynching by any means a sport in which any black was fair game. In Tennessee in 1911, four white men hanged a black man and his two daughters for no good reason. This outrage roused the ire of the community; the whites were tried and two were hanged.
It is true that blacks were lynched more often than whites, but, as is the case today, blacks were also more likely to commit violent crimes, so even if lynching had been entirely race-blind, the number of executions would still have been racially unbalanced. Prof. Murphey cites black homicide rates in 1921-22 for Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis and New Orleans per 100,000 that were 102.2, 97.2, 116.9 and 46.7 respectively. This corresponded to white rates of 15.0, 28.0, 29.6, and 8.4. According to Murphey, “These figures are eloquent testimony that serious crime was the primary provocation for lynching.” Even W.E.B. DuBois wrote disparagingly of “a class of black criminals, loafers, and ne’er-do-wells who are a menace to their fellows, both black and white.”
Wilkerson throws out – and is uncontested in her assertion and awarded for her efforts– an arbitrary number of Blacks being lynched at a rate of one every four days. That equals 91 per year. As we learned, the 87-year total of 4,742 lynching’s broke down to 1,297 being white and 3,445 being black (hate to break it to you, but lynchings were primarily a reaction to lawlessness and criminality).
That equates to a Black person being lynched once every nine days (some years had higher rates of lynchings). That high rates of Black crime might have necessitated swift justice is never a plausible answer; only white racism can equate for lynching.
That whites were lynched at a rate of one every 26th day doesn’t matter to those peddling the lynching guilt card. Take a look at this syllabus from a University of Cincinnati (on class on the history of lynching) which places the blame for lynchings on only white racism. Trying to deter high rates of Black criminality could never be considered a reason for the lynching of any Black person; only white racism can be blamed.
Consequently, that whites aren’t being shot at the same rate as New Orleans and Miami’s Black criminals are is a monumental problem that can only be solved with the shooting of more white criminals.
Better find some quick!
America has become such a colossal joke, that sometimes you just have to laugh. But, hey, the American Dream came true.
It is our belief that white guilt is quickly eroding in Black Run America. If positive images of Black people derived from sports and popular culture (Black Fictional Heroes) helped created BRA, then white guilt is the mortar that holds it all together, sustaining it.
Minority Subprime Disaster Costs US at Least $1.5 Trillion.
by James Buchanan
If you estimate an average loss in value of about $200,000 combined depreciation and damage to each home that was in the minority subprime loan program and that about 7.5 million Blacks and Latinos got these loans with no down payments and failed to pay them off, the total lost to the banking industry would be $200k times 7.5 million or $1.5 trillion dollars.
One source confirms the magnitude of this loss noting that: “The IMF estimates that financial institutions around the globe will eventually have to write off $1.5 trillion of their holdings of subprime MBSs. About $750 billion in such losses had been recognized as of November 2008. These losses have wiped out much of the capital of the world banking system.”
Various leftists have attempted to blame banks or predatory lenders for the subprime disaster. The truth is that minorities and liberal policies forced on the banks by federal courts caused this disaster. While it’s true that many banks offered one or two percent “teaser rates” for the first year of the mortgage, that doesn’t give the minorities an excuse. Just how unintelligent are people who don’t understand that the teaser interest rate is going to climb rapidly after the first year?
Most of the people who took these minority subprime loans were NOT serious first time home buyers, but were in fact doing real estate speculation, hoping to sell their house for a $50k to $100k profit after living in it for a year. Unfortunately for them (and for us) the housing bubble burst, millions of Blacks and Latinos (predictably) walked away from their financially underwater homes, and stuck the banks with the full financial loss since the liberals insanely waved the requirement for minorities to put down payments on their homes.
Very few articles in the mainstream media have discussed the role of minorities in the subprime disaster. A New York Post article reports that “a ‘landmark’ 1992 study from the Boston Fed concluded that mortgage-lending discrimination was systemic. That study was tremendously flawed – a colleague and I later showed that the data it had used contained thousands of egregious typos, such as loans with negative interest rates. Our study found no evidence of discrimination. Yet the political agenda triumphed – with the president of the Boston Fed saying no new studies were needed, and the US comptroller of the currency seconding the motion. No sooner had the ink dried on its discrimination study than the Boston Fed, clearly speaking for the entire Fed, produced a manual for mortgage lenders stating that: ‘discrimination may be observed when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.’ Some of these ‘outdated’ criteria included the size of the mortgage payment relative to income, credit history, savings history and income verification. Instead, the Boston Fed ruled that participation in a credit-counseling program should be taken as evidence of an applicant’s ability to manage debt. Sound crazy? You bet… On the Web, you can still find CRA loans available via ACORN with ’100 percent financing . . . no credit scores . . . undocumented income . . . even if you don’t report it on your tax returns.’ ”
So a fabricated “study” by the Boston Fed claimed that minorities were being discriminated against for home loans. In reality, Blacks and Latinos were failing to qualify for home loans because their average income is lower, their average credit history is worse and their ability to make a down payment is worse than the average for White people. Unfortunately, liberals entrenched in powerful positions in our government and court system chose to ignore all the evidence that ordinary Blacks and Latinos have certain inherent, persistent flaws that make them bad candidates for home loans.
Not only did the Feds demand that more loans be made to minorities, they insisted that traditional criteria like proof of employment and the ability to make a down payment should not be used to disqualify loan applicants. Lending to unqualified minorities was the first big reason for the subprime crisis. Eliminating down payments was the second big reason. The down payment is critically necessary in the mortgage industry. By forcing people to make a 20 percent down payment, the chances of the borrower “walking away” from a home loan (if the housing prices start to drop or the monthly payments increase) are greatly reduced.
The bottom line is that Third World people are financially bad for the US. Huge amounts of money are squandered on them to supply them with Section 8 apartments to live in, food stamps, welfare and now they will receive “Obamacare” and this additional tax burden will be dumped primarily on the shoulders of White taxpayers. Most of the good-paying jobs, that Blacks and Latinos get, are stolen from better qualified Whites thanks to Affirmative Action. The vast majority of Blacks and Latinos are poor and impose a gigantic tax burden on the rest of us. The state of California is rapidly plunging toward bankruptcy thanks to its non-White majority. Too many needy Third World poor and too few productive White taxpayers.
Perhaps, the most incredible thing about the Minority Subprime Mortgage Crisis is that most people did not know it was building up. It basically came out of nowhere with a price tag of 1.5 trillion dollars and it has greatly accelerated the financial collapse of California and the United States.
The Conservative Voice website has run an interesting column by Liz Davis on “The Macaca Effect,” which is the first time I have heard the word used in this context. The column starts off: “What is the ‘macaca effect’? First of all, what is a macaca? A ‘macaca’ is a racial pejorative to refer to someone either from or with ancestry from India or Pakistan. And the ‘macaca effect’ is pejorative used by people in high tech to refer to East Indians driving down the wages of American and British high tech workers. In many fields (computer programming, engineering, medicine, nursing, accounting, etc.) companies are faking labor shortages to acquire an H1B visa and hire East Indians, with the net effect of driving down the wages of American and British employees. Thus, one hears disgruntled employees talking about the ‘macaca effect.’ ”
Well, one would think they should be disgruntled. I never cease to be amazed at what Americans put up with from their government and their bosses, but historically, Americans have usually put up at least some kind of a fight when their money and material lifestyle were threatened. Good-paying jobs are getting increasingly scarce thanks to all the Third Worlders with H1B visas, and the future good-paying tech jobs will be non-existent for the next generation of Americans if current trends continue.
The column goes on: “Paul Craig Roberts, assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury in the Reagan administration, has written: ‘Offshoring has reduced the availability of good-paying jobs for middle-class Americans. It is not only manufacturing jobs that are being moved abroad, but software-engineering jobs, IT jobs, and a wide range of other professional occupations. Consequently, the ladders of upward mobility are being dismantled. Many of the professional jobs that remain are being filled with foreigners, especially engineers and IT professionals from India, who are brought in on work visas and paid less by U.S. employers, who falsely claim worker shortages.’ …High-tech insider Tom Stern says: ‘Indians are generally nice people. But when your company starts hiring them, you know the end is near. It’s like the early stages of cancer. Within one year, all of our wages were driven down by 45%. Big business is bringing over Indians for the sole purpose of pushing down American salaries.’ Many complain that this may be the end of Western economies, as they are slowly transformed into Third World economies. Journalist Brian Watson comments: ‘It is no coincidence that Jean Raspail, author of the conservative classic Camp of the Saints, selected East Indians to lead the invasion of the West. Indians are best equipped to infiltrate and bring down Western countries – and they can do it with an obsequious smile.’”
Americans should always remember this simple truism: Mexicans are being brought into this country to replace blacks. Asians and Indians are being brought in to replace whites because they can at least approximate the skill levels of white Americans although only on an imitative basis.
There is a cult-like religion among executives and CEOs of tech companies, who believe that Third Worlders are just as good as White American tech workers. Never mind the horrible bureaucracy back in India, India’s general backwardness and the dubious quality of their schools. It is “blasphemy” in corporate America to point out that Third Worlders are not as good as White Americans or that the products that they produce -like Vista- turn out to be more disappointing Hindu bloat-ware.
The Tea Party needs to add stopping H1B visas and stopping outsourcing to their agenda. Otherwise every American high tech company will suffer a huge drop in competency and our ability to beat the world at high-tech innovation will be destroyed.
In past blog postings for AltRight, I have discussed the phenomenon of what I call “totalitarian humanism,” a particular worldview that I regard as being at the heart of the most serious political and cultural problems currently facing the modern West. Specifically, I consider totalitarian humanism to be an intellectual and ideological movement among contemporary Western elites that serves as a replacement for older worldviews such as Christianity, nationalism, cultural traditionalism, Eurocentrism, or even Marxism. Such features of modern life as political correctness and victimology serve as a representation of the totalitarian humanist approach to domestic policy. The present war against the Libyan state provides an illustration of what the totalitarian humanist approach to foreign policy and international relations involves.
The regime of Colonel Qaddafi poses no conceivable threat to Western nations. Allegations of Qaddafi’s insanity not withstanding, his substantive efforts over the past two decades to ease tensions between Libya and the West have shown his capabilities for behaving as a rational actor and practicing realpolitik. As recently as August of 2009, Qaddafi was described by David Blair of the Daily Telegraphas having “gone from being the epitome of revolutionary chic to an eccentric statesman with entirely benign relations with the West.” These benign relations ended with the outbreak of the present civil war between Qaddafi and opponents of his regime. Richard Spencer has pointed out the nearly identical parallels between Western intervention in Kosovo in 1999 and the current intervention in Libya. Both interventions serve as prototypes for the vision for the world that our contemporary elites possess. An interesting discussion that aired earlier today on ABC’s This Weekcuts to the chase of the matter. Former Congresswoman Jane Harman, now of the aptly named Woodrow Wilson Center, monster neoconservative Paul Wolfowitz, and Wilson Center scholar Robin Wright provided rationales for the intervention that involved no consideration whatsoever of national interests, geopolitical questions, or legitimate defensive concerns. Essentially, their rationales amount to little more than “Qadaffi runs an illiberal regime.”
Libya under Qadaffi represents everything Western elites despise: a conservative, religious, nationalistic, traditional, patriarchal, tribal society that has resisted the penetration of its own culture by the norms of Western, secular, liberal, humanism and globalism. According to the religion of Western elites, Qaddafi is an infidel and must be punished or destroyed. The intervention in Libya is essentially about spreading the Jacobin revolution to the Middle East (a plausible argument of a comparable nature could be made concerning the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq). The role of the United Nations and the participation of certain usually rather pacific European nations in the assault on Libya is rather telling. The vision of the elites is one where a global super-state maintains an international army whose purpose is the eradication of political institutions and cultural values that fail to conform to the standards of totalitarian humanism. Kosovo and Libya are essentially pilot programs for this future vision.
The radical white hating youth corps president of South Africa called on white farmers and business owners to vacate their property and leave South Africa. ANC followers have been conducting a campaign of mass murder against white farmers since the ANC took power.
Controversial South African youth leader for the African National Congress has said ANC will follow the example of Zimbabwe’s Zanu PF and start to take over white-owned farms by the end of the year.
The comments were made by Julius Malema at a mine 160 kilometers outside Harare in Zimbabwe.
The ANC Youth Wing leader, enthused by rented Zanu PF crowd, said Zimbabwe had led the way in fighting over land and promised to unleash Zimbabwean tactics on South African white farmers.
He encouraged Zimbabweans to also take over white and foreign-owned companies. Malema said the people must embrace liberation and continue to fight against what he called Western imperialism.
He said: “You are not alone. Your struggle is our struggle.”
Malema also said he would continue to sing the song: “Kill the Boer,” a former ANC chant against the apartheid regime. The song was last week banned in a South African court.
In his thought-provoking article “The Rise of Anti-Western Christianity,” Matthew Roberts boldly tackles a subject which has become a source of vexing, contentious, and at times bitter debate among the various factions which make up the contemporary alternative Right.
Indeed, the discussion which played out in the comment section accompanying Robert’s piece at AltRight is illustrative, in that it reflects the typical trajectory of the rancorous back-and-forth one commonly overhears among those who, while sharing a common sense of disgust with the Zeitgeist’s relentless ideological war on Whiteness, have differing outlooks regarding the Christian religion and its supposed culpability in this course of events.
Unfortunately, as all too often happens in the heat of a fierce debate, subtlety of argument and nuance of thought tend to go by the wayside for favor of flailing rhetorical broadstrokes and ill-conceived strawman assertions. Self-styled “race realists” have long been at the receiving end of such logically fallacious ripostes, most of which boil down to some variation on the following: “You believe in inherent genetic racial differences? Then you’re no better than HITLER!”
It need hardly be pointed out that recognizing divergent levels of intelligence among racial groups has no necessary correlation with advocating tyranny and genocide. Yet this fact never seems to sway those who fling such accusations at dissenters from the Zeitgeist’s enshrined and requisite doctrine of racial egalitarianism. This glaring nonsequitur is, in fact, formulated almost automatically, in breathtaking defiance of common sense. And one can sympathize with race-realists in this regard (who are outrageously saddled with the moral baggage of historical mass murder)… if not for the unfortunate fact that many of them have a proclivity to be just as incautious in their dismissal of the Christian faith.
Indeed, it is often said that Christianity’s universalist creed is somehow an inherent impediment to a Westerner’s healthy drive to embrace and take pride in his own heritage. In fact, if looked at properly, it is precisely the catholic (with a small “c”) orientation of the Church that lends moral legitimacy to the appropriate ethno-racial perspective. Absent the anchor of faith, and the accompanying notions of natural law and justice, one founders on nihilism, an outlook which in no time leads into the maelstrom of terror and chaos.
*
***
*
First off, however, it must be admitted that Phillip Jenkins, author of The Next Christendom, is very much a product of his age, in that he takes racial indifferentism as a matter of course. There are no really notable or significant differences between the white man, the black man, the yellow man, the red man, and the brown man, he seems to think—all races are perfectly interchangeable, one with the other. Roberts does not misrepresent Jenkins’ rather glib and flippant indifference to the crisis of faith in the West. He correctly notes, in fact, that Jenkins pretty much shrugs at the Third World-ization of Christianity and the ongoing demographic and religious collapse of the West. In this sense, Jenkins has much in common with both “liberal” and ostensibly “conservative” wings of contemporary Western Christendom, both of which have enthusiastically embraced the race-neutral perspective in every regard (since to do otherwise would mean to be “just like Hitler”; see above).
But even if such a perspective is ubiquitous in our age, it ought not be concluded that the origin of this mindset is the universalistic creed of Christianity. After all, the Christian faith has existed for nearly two millennia, and only in the last half-century has its creed been construed in such a manner. In truth, while Christian doctrine does, indeed, believe in the equal spiritual status of all races (all men having been fashioned in the image and likeness of God), it in no sense maintains the interchangeability of one race with another, or the desirability of different races dwelling together, that is, multiculturalism. Just as the Church has always maintained that men and women, while each loved by God, are different, and ideally designed to play different roles, so there is nothing in the Christian creed which insists that, as über-douche Bono once warbled, “all the colors will bleed into one.” Indeed, while “people are people” (as the somewhat less douche-y but still annoying Depeche Mode singer informed us), common sense and simple observation helps one to see that differences between us are at least as notable and significant as our similarities.
What is more, it is only through a transcendentalist creed like Christianity that one is enabled to advocate for justice for one’s own people, because only a transcendent, universalist perspective gives one the obligation to stand up for what is right, good, and proper. Racial advocacy in the absence of such clear-cut moral precepts inevitably becomes arbitrary notions that undermine themselves.
Let us return to our oft-cited friend Hitler here to discuss the perfect example of this short-sighted ideological tactic…
In Mein Kampf, the mustachioed one thunders against the “November criminals” whom, he believed, betrayed his country at the end of World War I. He also inveighs against the harsh and vindictive terms of the Versailles treaty, which seemed to be designed specially to humiliate Germans. And, of course, he rails against the Jews, calling them (among other things) wanton, cruel, deceitful, and untrustworthy.
Let us leave behind the question of whether Hitler’s claims about the November criminals, the Versailles treaty, and the perfidious nature of the Jews were true or false; let’s assume for argument’s sake, in fact, that they are, in fact, all true. Hitler seems to be making the point that his people have been treated unfairly, and deserve redress. This is well and good… but then Hitler’s patently atheistic and social Darwinist views seem to undermine whatever moral case could have been made against the legitimate grievances he expressed previously. Germany needs to crush its enemies, and show no mercy—weakness must not be tolerated, ever, at any juncture—Might Makes Right—the strong dominate the weak—such is the way of nature.
Well, if these things are so, one might ask the angry Austrian autobiographer, then why should anyone care that Germany was humiliated? Why be angry with the Jew for allegedly seeking the German’s destruction, when the German would just as soon do the same thing to the Jew if their situations were reversed?
In other words, where is the claim to justice? And indeed, in the wake of the devastation of World War II, why are we supposed to shed crocodile tears for battered, bombed-out Dresden, for the victims of merciless Allied aerial raids on civilian centers in Hamburg and Berlin and elsewhere? How can we, why should we feel the least bit sorry for Germany, following Hitler’s own Nietzschian-Darwinian-derived worship of ruthless strength? After all, the stronger force always wins out in the end anyway, or else it couldn’t very well be called “stronger,” could it?
The Christian conception of things is quite different. It insists, not that might makes right, but that a just cause is a just cause, whether it be temporally triumphant or not. If a nation or a race is oppressed, then it has valid grounds to seek redress. Just as individuals possess the inherent dignity of being children of God, so does a particular subset of humanity. Thus, Whites, like any other race of men, are not enjoined to suffer being humiliated, run down, insulted, or be forced into dispossession of their inheritance.
The notion that Christianity makes white Westerners into meek little lambs fit for racial dilution, if not slaughter, is thus a crass and ill-informed misconception. For it is in the context of Christianity—or some other universal vision of humanity and human justice—that White advocates can be sure of the worthiness of their cause.
Of course, Christian doctrine also warns us not to mistreat other peoples, just as we would demand not to be mistreated ourselves. If some would chafe against this restraint as somehow weak and unmanly, let us remember that the alternative (“might makes right”) has much more potential to backfire badly if our side suffers a temporal setback. Christianity enjoins all people and all races to be mindful of justice, regardless of who is strong and who is weak. One need not jettison racial pride or preference for one’s own ethnic particularity to comprehend the wisdom of precisely such a universalist perspective.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues of ecological, political and humanitarian significance.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
Update:
In an effort to keep our readers aware of the world around them, due to the continued removal of free speech post and censorship, we will be in the process of looking for a new home for this site.
6/20/2011
We have located a new home for this site, please stand by for further instructions.
‘Man is a mammal and subject to the same biological laws as other animals. All animals, including Man, have inheritable behavioural traits. The concept of complete environmental plasticity of human intelligence is a nonsensical wishful-thinking illusion.’
“The time for talk has ended, only course of action open to us is WAR!”
"The time for talk has ended, only course of action open to us is WAR!"
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. — D.H. Lawrence
Ayers’ Plan to Kill 25 Million Americans
Larry Grathwol, Weathermen, William Ayers, Communism, History
line
“The most effective informer the F.B.I. ever placed among the Weathermen” (NY Times) Larry Grathwol describes how William Ayers and other Weather Underground leaders cheerfully planned to deliver the United States to foreign occupation, and proposed to murder 25 million Americans.
Grathwohl: I brought up the subject of what’s going to happen after we take over the government. You know, we become responsible for administrating, you know, 250 million people. And there was no answer. No one had given any thought to economics. How are you going to clothe and feed these people?
The only thing that I could get was that they expected that the Cubans, the North Vietnamese, the Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States. They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. And they felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education in the Southwest where we would take all of the people who needed to be re‑educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, “Well, what is going to happen to those people that we can’t re‑educate, that are die-hard capitalists?” And the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated and when I pursued this further, they estimated that they’d have to eliminate 25 million people in these re‑education centers. And when I say eliminate, I mean kill 25 million people. I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of whom have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people and they were dead serious.
Hat tip to Confederate Yankee.
By JDZ
Please leave a Comment or discuss via Trackback!
2 Feedbacks on "Ayers’ Plan to Kill 25 Million Americans"
Ayers’ Plan to Kill 25 Million Americans « Locust blog
[...] Ayers’ Plan to Kill 25 Million Americans [...]
06 Nov 2008 um 9:16 pm
black Locust
Bring it on! WE WILL FIGHT YOU, WE HAVE BEEN MAKING BOMBS AND BUYING LEGAL AND ILLEGAL WEAPONS FOR YEARS, AND WHEN THE TIME COMES MY FELLOW PATRIOTS AND MYSELF, WE WILL TAKE TO THE STREETS, YOU WILL HAVE TO KILL US TO TAKE THIS NATION, BRING IT!!
"What Every Christian Should Know About Islam". "Only communism rivals Islam in sheer numbers of people persecuted and killed."
How well a nonwhite majority will perform economically in America 2042?
How well a nonwhite majority will perform economically in America 2042?
Fortunately, we already have a gigantic test case: California, which is now only 43 percent non-Hispanic white.
So what can we learn about the future of America from California, where the state government may run out of money next month without a federal bailout?
For most of this decade, the financial wizards poured hundreds of billions of dollars into mortgage-backed securities originating in California. In other words, they made a colossal bet on diversity.
And lost.
It turned out that, while California’s new diverse population could certainly consume and speculate like old-fashioned white Americans, they couldn’t produce like them.
Australian model murdered by Sudanese Boyfriend.
The radical white hating youth corps president of South Africa called on white farmers and business owners to vacate their property and leave South Africa. ANC followers have been conducting a campaign of mass murder against white farmers since the ANC took power.
Recent Comments