Against Affirmative Action

(2008)

'...[I]t's hard for many people on either side of the issue to be colorblind'. Whites always say this when discussing positive discrimination that effects them, but never discuss positive discrimination effecting Blacks. This is proof of White racial hypocrisy and resentment since they can’t be anything other than racist because they refuse to be colorblind. When Whites discuss racism they can’t refrain from being racist in the very discussion since they always point out the skin color of those they discuss. The 'many people' referred to are, of course, White and no examples of those for whom color is not an issue are ever cited; making 'many people' really mean: 'all white people'. The paradox is that Whites can now only justify their racism if Blacks agree to it; reducing the negative effects of their bigotry. As usual, Whites judge the skin color of the speaker – not his statements. They are culturally and psychologically predisposed to do nothing else. If a Black criticizes affirmative action, Whites exploit his skin color to allege such discrimination is unfair. Thereby at once professing their racism while trying to deny it - by claiming there's no need for positive discrimination – except for Whites. Talk about trying to have it both ways! Yet, racists would never dare criticize White privilege as a form of affirmative action because they clearly believe it's acceptable – for them. The racial (& racist) inconsistency is clear. 'Ward Connerly, the California businessman on a state-by-state war against affirmative action' is not a race traitor - there's no such thing since there is only one race and he is a member of it - as everyone else is. He is a fool who refuses to accept the existence of endemic White Racism and the persistent White refusal to renounce the unearned economic privileges inherent in such a system of White Supremacy. He's helping to perpetuate such privileges and is, thus, helping to disable not only himself but also all of his descendents - he is doing the KKK's work for them. 'Affirmative action, he said, is an antiquated system that, rather than helping minorities, reinforces the perception they are second-class citizens who need help to succeed'. The same could equally well apply to Whites who use their racism to overcome their second-rate mediocrity and obtain well-paid jobs over-and-above their natural abilities. However, Mr Connerly never mentions the fact that without racism, Whites would be failures. '...[S]chools were picking less qualified minority students'. Yet this has always been the case with majority (White) students who, despite their comparative lack of qualifications, would obtain preferential treatment simply because they were White. He's doing the White Man's whining for him. 'Connerly's proposed constitutional amendments prohibit state and local governments from giving preferential treatment to people on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity or national origin'. This does not apply to Whites since such legislation already exists to allegedly curtail White racism – although this has clearly failed; hence, the existence of affirmative action in the first place. Such legislation always fails because you cannot legislate for love, so a handicapping system (against Whites) was introduced in compensation. Whites only have themselves to blame for affirmative action since, if they were not racist, no such action would be necessary. Kristina Wilfore, executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, is right: 'Ward Connerly... [profits] off a campaign to outlaw equal opportunity." He fights against race preferences for Blacks but not for Whites, so his claim to be egalitarian is false. Bizarrely, he also claims: 'I honestly think... Senator [Barack] Obama, in an ideal world, would like to get rid of race as an issue in American life'. Problem is, of course, we do not live in an ideal world and never will. There will always be discrimination and will, therefore, always be anti-discrimination - that's the way of the world since few can resist the temptation to take shortcuts to success by using unfair means. In any case, it's hardly for Blacks to deal with the problem of race since Whites created it and must now learn to stand on their own two feet and solve their own problems. There's also the fact that Whites are less racist to those less black than black. Those lighter skinned, who find greater acceptance from Whites, will always claim affirmative action is unnecessary. This denies their darker skinned brothers the advantages of their skin color in a racist culture, as Whites do this to Blacks, generally, via racism. These light skinned Blacks are simply racists in Whites' clothing and are just as racist. Whites are only against affirmative action when it negatively effects them, not when it negatively effects Blacks. Where were the Whites who believe all discrimination is wrong whenever Blacks remain unemployed because of their skin color? cowering within the emotionally-retarded limits of their racism. They are nowhere to be seen. As always, Whites claim more human rights for themselves than for Blacks and Mr Connerly is racist; hence, his popularity with Whites.

Article copyright © 2008 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is also the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on the Inevitability of Toe Jam in Hot Weather (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1997) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.

Acute Mental Health Wards are Failing Patients

The real problem here of course is that Blacks lack the sense of neighbourhood identity and personal drive to fund their own community services. They prefer, instead, to go cap in hand to Whites who are not only already racist, but who will continue to believe White racism is justified precisely because Blacks behave in this childlike manner.

Symposium on DNA Database

(2006)

'Open to the general public this meeting will look at why 57% of all innocent DNA in London is from black people and discuss (Sic) community leaders are concerns that the National DNA Criminal Database is criminalising (Sic) a community by stealth'. The answer to this question is obvious: Whites are racist and want to place Blacks under their thumb in a vain effort to stave off the inevitable Black backlash against that very racism. This means that the DNA database is not criminalizing Blacks by stealth – White Racism has already done so – this Database is merely an extension of that process. Thus, removing innocent Black people from this national database would defeat its racist purpose and is not, therefore, going to happen. It is a crime prevention measure not a crime curative measure – it seeks to shut the stable door BEFORE the horse has bolted not AFTER. And this can only be achieved by criminalizing Blacks as scapegoats for the failings and the inadequacies of White culture; particularly those concerned with (non existent) crime reduction. It should always be borne in mind that Whites never consider Blacks to be innocent of anything since Blackness is obviously the White Christian God's punishment for sins committed in a past life – at least according to Ham. Using the word "innocent" here suggests Whites judge Blacks by the actions they engage in - as well as those they don't. Whites don't do this. They judge Blacks by their skin colour – it's really that simple. 'Just being on that database suggests that you are involved in criminal activity. This goes against the original purpose of the database, which was to keep records of convicted criminals . (Sic) Something needs to be done as the Government may change the rules on how this technology (Sic) used which may go against us in the future', Bishop Wayne Malcolm Christian Life City Chair in Hackney East London. Needless to say, the good bishop has his head up his anus. The "original purpose" of the database was never revealed to the public otherwise there would have been an outcry at the time. Now that it has been created it is too late to talk about its original purpose: A complete listing of the entire population – regardless of criminal behaviour. Now nothing can be done to prevent this and this database will certainly be used against Blacks – as scapegoats - "in the future" whenever Whites commit more crimes or whenever the White economy goes belly up as it regularly does. 'If you want the BME communities to trust the police and the establishment then they must be open and transparent… It undermines community cohesion and a lot of good work that has been done,' Pastor Desmond Hall, Christian Together in Brent. Another fool who believes Blacks could ever trust a racist police service policing an endemically racist country. One might as well say that there would come a time when parents could ever trust paedophiles. By the way, there's no such thing as "community cohesion" and one would dearly wish to know what "good work" Pastor Hall thinks "has been done". By whom? When? 'It is a travesty that we have to lobby our government and lawmakers to take action to protect the innocent and some of the most vulnerable groups in society. - Olu Alake, president, 100 Black Men of London.' Whites created "[M]ost vulnerable groups in society" for them to have a pool of scapegoats – in perpetuity. This is why Whites are not keen on helping the poor out of poverty; preferring, instead, to condition them to it via a welfare system designed to institutionalise the condition. Moreover, governments are not concerned with the protection of the innocent but with the apportionment of blame. No matter what folly governments involve themselves in, they never take the blame for any mistakes that they make. Innocence itself is no protection against the predatory nature of Whites – you must expose their racism at every turn to exploit the race guilt the more fully for the benefit of Blacks. 'The recent massive expansion of the DNA database is not helping to solve more crimes, but rather threatening the rights o (Sic) those who have been arrested and have their DNA on the database indefinitely.' It was never designed to do the former – only to give the impression that it could. The same is true of identity cards, which are designed to allow the police to harass Blacks. The threat here is designed to show Blacks that, as far as Whites are concerned, Blacks have less human rights than Whites - and Blacks had better get used to it. Ultimately, there is no argument here to refute the usual White canard that if you have nothing to hide, and are as innocent as you say you are, then what's the problem? The problem, of course, is Whites using skin colour as a metric of character – as they have always done.

Mayor's Report: Lee Jasper Responds

Like so many Blacks who believe Whites can change, Lee Jasper is dangerously naïve and politically unsophisticated. For Jasper to claim that his reputation has been 'badly damaged' is purest whining of the basest kind. Only among Whites can a reputation be damaged since Whites assume all Blacks genetically corrupt to begin with such that Blacks can never actually possess a good reputation – no matter how hard they try. Therefore, the reputation of any Black can never be damaged among Whites since a Black with a good reputation cannot possibly exist inside the racist mindset of Whites. Lee Jasper needs to seriously consider what his constituency really is since such damage to his reputation can only occur among Blacks. (Incidentally, 'false allegations' is a semantic solecism since allegations can only ever be true, otherwise they would not exist in the first place! It is only the lack of evidential support that can make them false, not the allegations themselves.) Jasper claims that when Whites talk about 'waste', they're really talking about Black organisational funding. This is more whining. Blacks need to finance their own development from their own hard work & effort and stop relying on Whites, as such, and White Race guilt to help Blacks out. The latter merely contributes to a racist White backlash against anyone with the so called temerity to remind Whites how racist they are. Only by independence can Blacks learn to stand on their own two feet and stop feeding the White racist propaganda machine that says Blacks are incapable of separate development, on their own. Jasper goes on to claim that Whites seek to 'demonise' London's Blacks. Obviously, however, they do not seek to do this since they have already done so – at least in their own minds – for the past seven centuries. In reality, Whites seek to exploit the already existing White view that Blacks are a demonic threat to the alleged superiority of White culture. Lee Jasper here implies that Whites are morally empty, easily led fools when, in addition, they are merely already replete with easily exploitable race hatred. You cannot 'demonise' anyone who's already seen as demonic. Despite the complete absence of evidence of fraud on Lee Jasper's part, he cannot be nearly so ingenuous as he implies he is since he must know full well that Whites believe that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The racist smoke Whites create by the very activity they call racism is precisely designed to allow Whites to falsely claim: "There's no smoke without fire". Bizarrely and stupidly, Jasper believes Whites should be honest about their racism! Clearly, this will be no more the case than a force of terrorists giving the West prior warning of a terrorist outrage! To openly admit to being racist would undermine the very racism Whites seek to perpetrate on their betters. Because Whites need the feelings of superiority that come with being racist it's hardly likely they are going to make it obvious that they are using underhand methods to achieve political advantage. Especially when Whites make such a play of their self willed belief in their own ability to engage in "fair play". The truth is that Whites lack the intellectual development and the morality to justify their racism, which is precisely why they'll be as covert about it as possible. Lee Jasper simply wants a level playing field of racist practice which, since racism is decidedly inegalitarian, is a ridiculous admission of his own inability to spot White Racism when he's confronted with it. In which case, what kind of Race Advisor can such a man really be when he so profoundly misidentifies the real issues at hand.

BBC still ‘hideously white’

(2008)

'Has the Beeb demonstrated that while its talk a good talk about equality events of late show that its not free of racist basis in its employment practices and its programme output. (Sic)' This has always been the case for race issues as it has always was – and always will be – for gender, sexuality and class issues. The BBC is a white propaganda organisation for the dissemination of lies about how wonderful White People are. It is an arm of government for precisely that purpose; establishing its fraudulent credentials by claiming to be objective, fair and impartial while never providing objective, fair and impartial definitions of these terms nor of what they mean by them. 'The objective was clear the BBC wanted to find evidence of corruption, fraud or anything else that could be used to discredit Lee Jasper former Senior Policy Director of the Mayor of London Ken Livingstone.' Obviously, when Whites are found fiscally corrupt, news of this is always downplayed in White Media outlets such as the BBC. Whites must teach a high profile pointer-out of White Racism like Lee Jasper a lesson because They are fed up with their negrophobia constantly being pointed out to Them because of the White Guilt it makes Them experience. Mr Jasper troubles the White Conscience and he must be destroyed in order to regain the racist balance required if Whites are to continue enjoying the unearned benefits of racial privilege in an institutionally racist country like the UK. 'The BBC London team used its vast resources on line (Sic) and radio combined with television to engineer a sense of manufactured crisis around Lee Jasper on (Sic) of the most senior black figures in the United Kingdom and its news reports sought to suggest impropriety and high corruption.' The more important issue is that whatever Whites want to talk about dominates the news agenda of supposedly objective news reporting. The very fact of talking about it is designed to create a "no smoke without fire" atmosphere in which Their fellow Whites will automatically and eventually assume that no matter the lack of evidence, there must be something to all this otherwise why would it be reported so extensively? Few Whites openly state that this is a self fulfilling agenda in which people are allegedly found guilty on the basis of nothing more than unprovable racist allegations – allegations repeated as allegations precisely because They cannot be proven. The most surprising thing here is that evidence against Lee Jasper has not been planted to put him on trial – but we may have that yet to come. This mirrors the fact that racism itself is an unprovable fallacy that Whites continue to believe simply because They wish to, not because They have found any evidence of actual Black inferiority. 'The BBC harassed anyone connected with Lee Jasper including the charity the 1990 Trust whom it recently accused, without a shred of evidence of failing to properly account for project funding received some five years ago.' More of the same racist muckspreading. The issue here is that racism is designed to create a one size fits all approach to racism in that all Blacks are tarred with the same brush if only one is found malfeasant. This is the collective punishment favoured by racists like Adolf Hitler and the present Israeli government. Whites are trying to provide Themselves with an age old justification for judging all Blacks by the worst examples of the race; all Whites by the best since when a White fucks up, it's claimed he's merely a rotten apple, not an exemplar of the entire contents of the barrel. 'The record of the BBC in employing black people in senior positions is a disgrace and the constant downgrading of black presenters within BBC London, their failure to invest in them and recognise their skills and expertise is evidence of the level of institutional racism at the Beeb.' The problem Whites have here is that They cannot allow Blacks to rise to senior positions precisely to protect White racist privileges. And to conceal from Blacks the fact that such privileges exist. The latter is impossible because racism only works in overt mode; making its presence self evident, as here: 'A climate of fear and intimidation has developed at the BBC and many staff feel deeply intimidated by the racism that has been unleashed by the BBC.' 'As on (Sic) young black man said recently "BBC in London is in real danger of being known as the British Broadcaster for Caucasians"'. This is naïve in the extreme since the BBC has always been this.