Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts

Sunday, 30 July 2017

Lunatics

(2017)

Lunatics Taking Over the Asylum

Trashy Cultures Produce Trashy People

The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual.

Image of Aristotle Aristotle (384‑322 BCE), Greek Philosopher. Politics, Book 3, chapter 3, section 16 (350 BCE).

On Friday, 31 March 2017 15:05, I approached PC05 in Tunbridge Wells’ Library. A White male saw me do so then, knowingly and intentionally, stepped right in front of me and then unplugged it to insert his mobile phone charger; seating himself at the chair in front of it to deliberately block my passage.

His companion (another White male) trying to use PC06 noted my presence and I was forced to remove the charger and re‑insert the PC plug into its socket. I then asked this man to move and relinquish the seat for PC05.

He became sullen and childish and his standing companion demanded I should remain polite when dealing with racial‑harassment – something I never do, since racist micro‑aggressions:

  1. Always calls forth my generalised contempt for Caucasians;
  2. put me under no obligation to treat racists as equals; &,
  3. are based upon the White supremacy that can get me killed (that I am willing to kill to protect myself from).

The standing gentleman wisely chose to de‑escalate a situation, which I never initiated (that he realised could so easily have turned physically‑violent, since I am never going to tolerate any racist nonsense); by getting his companion to relinquish the seat he was occupying – thereby allowing me to go about my lawful business in a lawful manner. His wisdom, however, did not extend to not causing such attention‑seeking scenes in the first place, nor to realising that rights works both ways and a violation of one by another will lead to an equal violation by the other to the one.

PC05 clearly indicated that it had been booked, yet the seated gentleman initially‑refused to relinquish the chair for PC05 and, in a childish fit of pique, pushed it across the room so that it hit the back of the chair of a woman sitting at (I think) PC02. She remonstrated with him briefly about this.

I somehow doubt that if I went to their homes and ate their food and watched their tvs (claiming private property was public property, in the process), that their response to this would be any less aggressive than mine to their claim to personally own public property by believing they can disable PCs and use their electrical sockets to charge their phones.

Scared at the thought of a well‑built Black man physically‑attacking them, they both then tried to blame the intended victim of their White supremacist attitudes by complaining of the fact they now found they could not sit next to me on PC06 because of the atmosphere of violence (which they, themselves, irresponsibly created). They quickly left, muttering insults such as Fucking prick and Twat.

Needless to say, neither male complained to library staff about my behaviour, since they both knew they were in the wrong; making it obvious how discourteous Whites will be in order to defend their imaginary White supremacist rights; while expecting Black people to be remain polite no matter what. (Of course, I never complained to library staff since the last time I did [7/1/2016], I was accused of being racist and subsequently banned from all Kent libraries for six months – accused of the non‑existent Protest Psychosis.) No apology was offered me, by either – hardly a surprise from people who have about as much respect for others as they do for themselves.

As usual with White males, necessarily‑aggressive and intimidating behaviour from Black males ‑ even when outnumbered (as here) ‑ is enough to cool their racist ardour, as well as to self‑fulfillingly convince them that Black people are so dangerous to White people that White supremacy appears justified.


The world is too dangerous to live in – not because of the people who do evil, but because of the people who sit and let it happen.

Lex Talionis

My physical size was mentioned by them as somehow a threat despite this not obviously being the case when they decided to obstruct me. Why fear me for my size after the incident they initiated rather than before it, since my size did not change at any time during my time in the library?

In the twisted world of White people, People Of Colour (POC) using their physical size against White supremacists is bad; while White supremacists using their racism against POC is somehow OK. Somehow, Whites think it unfair that they were born smaller than those they hate and fear, so are stupid enough to antagonise those bigger than themselves; creating conflicts they are too physically weak to fight!

This absurd White terror is a tacit confession of a peculiar White psychological weakness. Given that there were two of them and only one of me, my size should never have been a problem for them; unless they were suggesting that Whites can only overpower Blacks at a higher ratio than two‑to‑one, despite their master race sympathies. Is White people’s fear of POC so great that, even when the odds are in their favour, Whites back down? Equal‑opportunities’ racists believe Black people should handicap themselves to make White supremacy easier to practice: That Blacks actually fighting back is somehow fundamentally‑unfair to White people!

Respectability politics

This was also a rather obvious example of the White desire that POC always be polite to them no matter the provocation and no matter the fact that politesse is a two‑way street. And no matter the fact that despite higher standards of public behaviour among Blacks, Whites will still be racist, because appeasing White societal values does not promote respect, but is instead a fear‑fuelled defence mechanism of minority communities; resulting in the challenge for POC of negotiating everyday social spaces; potentially negatively‑impacting their mental health since White supremacy is not a reaction to unethical Black behaviour (which can be changed) but to skin colour (which cannot); meaning White acceptance can only come from Black self‑denial.

It takes huge amounts of White chutzpah to be abusive and then to claim that it is, in fact, the abuser whom is being abused (like a murdering US policeman claiming a fleeing Black male made him fear for his life). However, it is an infallible rule of retribution that its instrument be forged not by the offended, but by the offenders – themselves – in their desperate bid to rationalise their problem‑cuasing behaviour. The offers POC no incentive to behave as submissively as Whites would like.

Despite living every day with institutionalised racism, if POC express any emotion while talking about it, they are told they are being angry – in a desperate White attempt to shut down the speaker and invalidate any arguments made by claiming that they are overly‑sensitive or being too emotional; Whites playing the race card which only they can benefit from.

Or worse, POC are told that they are being racist, without explaining how the victim can be the victimiser or the rapee the rapist. Moreover, no explanation is ever offered as to why people who live with the constant fear of themselves, their friends, their families, their entire ethnic group being wiped‑out on a whim should not be angry. Must women being raped be polite to their assailants?

If I allow anyone to define my rights without my consent, then I, effectively, give them the right to do as they wish with me – even to the point of deciding to end my life whenever they see fit.

Regarding White supremacy – marginalisation, ostracism & exclusion – it is not up to Whites to decide how upset POC should be. If Whites have a right to express their true feelings, then so do POC – even, and especially, when those expressions frighten Whites: There can be no such thing as being too loud or too angry when it comes to standing up for the value of one’s life. (After all, no‑one is required to earn the human rights they were born with by doing as Whites tell them.)

This must be how Rosa Parks must have felt when she sat in omnibus seats reserved for White people – the only problem here, of course, being that there is no Jim Crow in the UK. Yet there is also no self‑respectful concern here for how POC feel about such behaviour from such high‑handed Whites, along with the belief that I have no right to be annoyed about it. Obviously, I am not allowed to protest at this arrogant display of White privilege.

Clearly, White people value their hurt feelings more highly than the lives of POC: These must be protected at all costs, lest a single White person be shown to be complicit in a racist system designed to adversely affect millions whose lives Whites simply do not care about. White supremacists pretend they do not understand why their racism makes POC angry; proving that they are as sub‑human as they claim POC are. If White people do not wish to see Black anger, it is simple: Stop provoking it.

Morality

There is clearly here an inability to distinguish right from wrong and to indulge in immature fantasies of self‑righteous empowerment over others. It has always been obvious to me that White hypocrisy is deeply‑rooted in the Caucasian voodoo of White supremacy. Whites do not wish to understand that social life, which follows upon the natural sociality of human beings, implicates the individual in a web of moral obligations, commitments & duties to be fulfilled in pursuit of the common good; things superfluous by Whites, yet central to good moral character.

This kind of manic behaviour in the UK is only ever manifested regularly by White people, in their unsubstantiated belief that they – alone – own public space. Why do I not, apparently, possess a right to be offended by any attempt to violate my rights with an imaginary right to engage in such a violation?

White Whine

They were both annoyed that their claims of White supremacy did not make me fear them – why would they? No‑one has ever met a superior White man. This is the usual attempt by Whites to project the racially‑hostile atmosphere they single‑handedly create on to POC in a desperate bid to blame POC for White supremacy: A kind of malignant narcissism.

Upset and resentful because I have first‑refusal over a PC I had booked and was willing to fight them over their belief that the booking system does not apply to me and could be so easily‑invalidated by them.

There is something absurdly peculiar in fear‑fuelled White self‑pity in that it is also, simultaneously, self‑aggrandising. And is what can happen if they indulge their fantasies of the world owing them a living: A Moral hazard. It is the belief that treating others well is somehow a psychic loss to the person behaving well. If such people cannot grasp the basic rules of social conduct, then they should only be allowed out on the shortest of leashes.

Legal Rights

No‑one can tell me why POC have to put up with this nonsense, especially as my inevitably‑angry response is a scary learning‑curve for those who mistakenly‑assume I believe the world owes them a living. It also ensures that all those Whites who witness my behaviour are less likely to emulate racist behaviours both to me, my friends, my family and, indeed, my entire ethnic group – all in the interests of ethnic self‑defence.

Social existence is a rule‑governed, game‑playing ritual. But for the sad person, rules are bent and loopholes exploited; while engaging in social performances that obey common expectations, yet are designed to defy others and, thereby, gain unearned respect: All to avoid their taking personal responsibility for the resolution of their personal problems. I am not a do‑gooder and care nothing for the self‑inflicted problems of the mentally‑ill. If I can toughen‑up regarding existential problems, then so can they. Living in a racist culture like White culture, I have had to toughen‑up since my very life depends upon doing so.

Filtering Customers

It is hardly surprising that few POC use the Library Service in Kent, given the open hostility of both its staff and customers to their very presence. This, despite the fact that there is an ongoing decline in the Britain’s public libraries that is partly attributable to their not wanting any POC to be customers; thereby reducing hastening the decline.

Fear & Loathing

My approach is simple. I employ the Golden Rule (only do unto others what you would wish done to you). When others do not follow this rule, I am then able to use the norm of reciprocity; meaning I can do unto them what they have done to me. It is always important to recognise that the behaviours associated with anger are designed to warn aggressors to stop their threatening behaviour, which is why modern psychologists view anger as a primary, natural and mature emotion, experienced by virtually all humans – and as something that has functional survival value.

Given the trashy people White culture regularly produces, and the fact that no‑one I know really has the time for their childishness, POC clearly need to be appropriately‑aggressive, suitably‑threatening and personally‑intimidating to Whites in order to enforce their rights, since POC are not responsible for the feelings of White supremacists. This not only saves time and resources going to court, but helps enforce rights I actually do possess to stop Whites from trying to enforce rights they do not. I have no choice but to be an anti‑racist at all times, since my life is at stake. If White fear is the only way forward, then that is all fine by me, since this will involve very little work on my part since Whites already fear POC – as the above example clearly reveals.











Postscript: Coincidentally, I was recently reading an article on 249-665-1-PB.pdfWhite fragility, which helps explain some of the underlying psychological‑processes at work:

  1. Because Whites think they can claim unfair treatment when their racially‑entitled position is challenged by People of colour POC, Whites are able to demand that more social resources (eg, time & attention) be channelled in their direction to help them cope with the alleged mistreatment: If privilege is defined as a legitimisation of one’s entitlement to resources, it can also be defined as permission to escape or avoid any challenges to this entitlement (Vodde [2001], page 3); &,
  2. by suggesting POC are abusing White people in expecting equality, Whites tap into the classic discourse of People of Colour (POC) as dangerous‑because‑inherently‑violent; perverting the actual direction of danger existing between Whites and others. The history of brutal, extensive, institutionalised and ongoing violence perpetrated by Whites against POC becomes profoundly‑trivialised when Whites claim they are under attack in the unusual situation of merely talking with POC; illustrating how fragile and ill‑equipped White people are to confront the racial tensions they create – and their subsequent, evasive projection of their maladjustment onto POC (Morrison, 1992).

Tuesday, 14 March 2017

DO FRONT‑LINE LIBRARY STAFF REALLY NOT TELL CUSTOMERS THAT PCs ARE BOOKABLE?

At around 15:30, on Thursday, 7 January 2016, at Tunbridge Wells Library, a White male (sitting with a friend using PC4, in the chair for PC3) refused to move from this chair to allow me to use PC3 - after my asking him politely to do so (hear attached audio). (PC3 had been booked for me by a member of staff.)

(2016)

DO FRONT‑LINE LIBRARY STAFF REALLY NOT TELL CUSTOMERS THAT PCs ARE BOOKABLE?

At about 14:00, on Sunday, 17 January 2016, at Tunbridge Wells Reference Library, I politely asked a White woman (apparently using your Wi‑Fi on her laptop) to move from PC19. She asked Why, so I told her I had booked it. She then told me that she had been told it had not been booked; implying a Black man was a liar – without evidence.

Proving a negative is impossible and, in any case, it would have meant her looking at the PC screen every 60 seconds to see whether or not her claim continued to be true: Something only a stupid person would ever do. She obviously believed that if a PC has not been booked - at any time - that it will not be booked for as long as she wishes to sit at it, without using it; despite her tacit admission that most PCs are, in fact bookable – at any time during library opening hours. (Surreally, it would also mean it is possible to not‑book a PC for a specific amount of time; the direct corollary of being able to book a computer for one hour – only that, in the former case, such an impossible not‑booking could last a whole day and - somehow - be of a higher priority than actually booking one.)

She could only ever know the PC was not booked at the moment she alleged she was told it – it could then easily cease being not‑booked at every succeeding minute. Moreover, since the screen‑saver was engaged, she had no information from the PC itself to support her nonsensical claim. She was, thus, sitting at a computer she was not using that she had not booked but, somehow, that was a rational and logically‑defensible reason to be in my way – like an able‑bodied driver parking in a Disabled Parking space simply because it is empty! (There appears to be an awful lot of mental illness or arrogant stupidity in Tunbridge Wells among Whites who also claim clairvoyant powers, in implying they possess the amazing foresight to know, in advance, that any library not‑booked library PC will remain so until they have finished obstructing it.)

Inevitably, the monitor screen said, in English: This machine has been booked – and she was clearly a native English‑speaker. But rather than do the sensible thing and look at this screen, she chose to imply that Whites have an unwritten right to lie to Black people.

Is her use of Wi‑Fi somehow a justification for denying the use of bookable PCs? If so, where is this peculiar rule written down, so that we can all be made aware of it – in advance?

Did library staff actually tell her the PC had not been booked; proving they do not understand that a PC can be booked at any time and that, therefore, non‑PC users should never be sitting at them – unless the PC is out‑of‑order? According to Occam’s Razor, she was lying, since I find it hard to believe that any member of staff – even those I have previously called‑out as fools – could really be so stupid as to not know that PCs are booked on an ongoing‑basis throughout the library’s opening hours. (I would also be surprised if any member of staff would be prepared to be so stupid as to admit that they have made any such statement to any customer – ever.)

She claimed I was abrupt, but this claim is more motivated by being asked to move by a Black man, than anything the attached audio recording actually indicates. It also indicates she was clearly not willing to be aware of her surroundings while in public. Pretending that she was shocked by my asking her to move is the old trick of pretending she has a right not to be disturbed - even when in someone else’s way - and that anyone who does so is somehow up to no good. This means that no matter how polite Black people are, they are always going to be cast as villains by retarded Whites.

As an example of rational behaviour, a week before, I asked an Asian gentlemen to vacate a seat he had taken from a PC I had booked. He did so without demur in a polite social exchange; proving that these weird incidents represent a negative correlation, among Whites, between the colour of one’s skin and the depth of one’s common sense: The lighter, the more absurd; the darker, the more sensible. Whites believe that public space is a mere extension of their own living rooms and that they, therefore, can publicly‑carouse as they please – even if this means obstructing others going about their lawful business.

Sunday, 1 January 2017

Damonsplaining

How Caucasians Navigate the Choppy Seas of White Guilt

M att  Damon and Miley Cyrus could never accept that their success is anything but the result of a meritocracy which Whites have never practiced. To believe otherwise would mean Whites accepting they possess no merit other than that which they claim they possess, but which they cannot prove they actually do.

Yet, Damon is promoting his career by talking the shite he benefits from: Fools like him should take their own advice and keep their personal opinions to themselves. But because Whites think themselves omniscient, they do not feel the need to listen to others because they think they already know everything.

As Whites must suppress their truly-human natures in order to be loyal to (& continue benefiting from) White supremacy, Whites require others to repress theirs – on the false basis that White culture is a protection racket where one will not be abused so long as one obeys Whites. Not so that these others can be successful in an emotionally-repressive White culture, but so that Whites can appear greater than the then similarly identity-deprived ethnic competition. This allows Whites to hide their quintessential mediocrity behind the facade of fitting-in with other Whites; while hopefully avoiding the invidiousness of seeing others enjoying themselves. Like the puritanical, Whites are terrified that someone, somewhere is having the fun that they are not.

This bigoted discrimination means the hated groups must do as they are told by those who hate them as a vain means of not upsetting the bigots, despite the hated groups not being the cause of the bigotry. This would mean, for example, heterosexuals going out in public while homosexuals must hide in private.

This means Rupert Everett never got the role of 007 because he is gay, not because the Bond producers are homophobic. This means that Black people should hide the fact that they are Black – to further their careers. And that women should conceal their breasts and vaginas to further theirs. In other words, be less like yourselves and more like White people; ie, hate your own nature just as much as they hate theirs. Matt Damon thinks the sun shines from his arsehole, so believes that if only everyone else were like him, they would be as lovable as he obviously thinks he is.

Matt Damon is a moron of epic proportions because when Whites reach adulthood, they cannot determine – objectively – whether their success is either 100% due to their skin color, mostly due to it, partly due to it or entirely the result of merit. Not knowing leads Whites to doubt any talent their fans imply they possess; making them angrily-delusional in accepting the White belief that White culture is meritocratic and that their success is actually 100% deserved. In this needily-neurotic way, White self-distrust seems to be evaded, yet the doubts and the doubters remain – to be vainly attacked with the White supremacy that increases with age whenever anyone points out that the emperor is actually a nudist.

The only way for Whites to avoid such a painful realization is to claim that Black people possess no merit Whites need to respect and imply, therefore, that White supremacy is somehow justified because Whites are the only people with any real merit. No evidence that White supremacy is merit-based is ever adduced because Whites want (& need) to believe their own self-fulfilling hyperbole about themselves, since hype is all they have.

This White self-delusion neatly avoids the need to create the meritocracy Whites do not really believe in. Simultaneously, it is used to claim that Black people’s claim that diversity is better than White supremacy is seen as a threat to Whites’ non-existent meritocracy, because it is based on the implication that Black people are trying to obtain something-for-nothing. Yet, this is precisely what Whites are trying to obtain by making the false claim of possessing inherently-meritocratic political instincts.

The schizophrenia of not wanting a meritocracy, while claiming they already have one, demonstrates that Whites want to believe that White supremacy is the only kind of meritocracy possible. The fact that White supremacy induces laziness – by attempting to nullify both any kind of competition & any fear of losing – is evidenced by the White resentment Whites confer upon successful Black people whenever a more-or-less level playing-field actually does exist (eg, in music & sport), since these prove that Black people are just as meritorious as Whites or, worse for White egomania, moreso.

In other words, American Whites imply that when Blacks were slaves, Whites were happy meritocrats who are now being emotionally blackmailed into giving Blacks more credit than they actually deserve. White self-delusion claims that Institutional Racism is meritocratic; that employing Whites is always based on merit; &, that employing Blacks is always based on skin color. All this to avoid the guilt-ridden reality that Whites believe their automatic merit resides, primarily, in their skin pigmentation and that such affirmative action is only bad for Black people.

The inevitable-because-well-founded realization – when Whites are successful – is that Whites achieve mostly because of the Affirmative Action of White supremacy, not because of any actual merit. And that, therefore, any Black failings are the result of their non-existent genetic inferiority. In the same way that White women know that White men are programmed by White supremacy to find only White women sexually attractive, they can then twist this political fact into the metaphysical fantasy that this is because White women are actually the most beautiful of any ethnic group.

Mediocrities like Damon and Cyrus need to believe such nonsense, otherwise they would realize that their success in life is based on little more than their skin color. This would be a White guilt-inducing blow to their fragile egos that few Whites can effectively deal with because White supremacy does not provide Whites with the psychological wherewithal to honestly face the objective reality outside their reality-denying heads.

Thursday, 3 March 2016

O J Simpson

(2015)

Summary: Critique of “”.

What upsets Whites about the OJ Simpson criminal trial is that his guilt had to be proved – beyond a reasonable doubt – which it was not. Previously, Black guilt had merely to be assumed and asserted by Whites to be accepted as a form of proof – by Whites – in a White supremacist justice system in which proof of Black guilt was never really deemed necessary.

If OJ Simpson had murdered Black people, his guilt or otherwise would not so enrage Whites. As it was, it appeared a Black man was getting away with murder which, heretofore, was seen as a White man’s sole preserve: 99% of White lynchers were never tried for murder and few Whites were outraged by the Rodney King beating. Whites now fear that Black people will be allowed to murder them (& get away with it), as Whites continue to murder Black people (& not be punished for it) to this day. A racial dread that Whites are not prepared to live with; while angrily‑demanding that Black people do just that – regarding voracious White supremacy; resulting from the non‑crime of being Black.

Whites, here, are not concerned with such weighty matters as evidence or proof, merely with Black guilt; ie, the White belief that Black people are automatically guilty and that criminal trials of Black people are a waste of White people’s money and time.

A mostly‑White jury found Simpson civilly‑liable for murder; while a mostly‑Black one found him criminally‑innocent. Whites simply cannot bring themselves to believe that Black people are rational enough to present the correct verdict; ie, one politically‑acceptable to Whites. This is why the OJ Simpson criminal verdict was the only one after which Whites demanded IQ tests for jury‑members – they have never done this when a White is wrongly‑acquitted of murdering a Black person. Black people will always judge cases on the basis of ethnicity; while Whites will always judges cases on the facts – something that can easily be shown to be historically‑false.

Thursday, 27 August 2015

Political Correctness

(2015)

White Whine for Beginners

Hypocritically disregarding their own political correctness (PC) in telling others what to think without supporting rights or logical justification, this is the usual White whine about alleged inferiors getting rights Whites exclusively covet for themselves.

‘Our country’ is, of course, a Whites-only political formation: Whites will never use the word ‘our’ to include People Of Color (POC).

If PC is an attack on White free speech, why are so many Whites free to condemn it? The White fear is that they will be penalized for speaking freely, as if this kind of punishment were somehow new for this kind of speech and as if Whites had a right to consequenceless actions when all acts imply the risk of censure.

Whites resent being penalized for the free speech they have traditionally punished others for invoking - and are really only taking here about free speech for Whites. (When, for example, Whites are attacked for being racist, one quickly sees how much commitment Whites have to the free speech of others in their attempts to shut down the attack.)

Whites blaming Marxism for their own penchant for PC is a typical White intellectual dodge in trying to hide the inherently-PC nature of all White cultures - the PC belief that Whites are genetically-superior to everyone else - and that this is to be believed by all, come what may and evidence to the contrary.

The author does not say what the ‘cohesive elements of our [White] society’ actually are. They do not exist, of course - except for the shared PC belief that Whites are superior to everyone else. This helps Whites evade the issue that White culture will always be repressive and illiberal. He denies the existence of activities like racism, sexism & classism by suggesting that civil rights for POC has done ‘untold damage to ‘our [White] society’ by giving freedoms to unnamed ethnic groups (eg, POC) whom he obviously believes should not have them.

The author makes further unsubstantiated claims about British education being liberal, when Blacks have been systematically-encouraged not to take it up. His claim the UK police are not institutionally-racist proves he has never been abused or harassed by White police officers simply for being Black. And is a claim made despite the wealth of evidence that Whites, as such, are just as institutionally racist.

The usual resentful White supremacist claptrap about Travelers and undocumented migrants is well to the fore in the form of statements not supported by evidence. He is resentful that White humor, typically racist, has been neutered; clearly indicating his approval of such racism and his belief that free speech includes the ability to deliberately offend, hurt & abuse others, for no particular reason, when this is something few Whites would countenance for an instant. Whites will not tolerate jokes about terrorists as Whites board planes since it is White lives that are threatened, but they will tolerate plenty of jokes about POC receiving state welfare benefits. He does not clearly define what (the fiction) ‘not real abuse’ is especially when compared to ‘real abuse’ - which he thinks does not exist in his Nazi fantasy land. He even claims there is such a thing as ‘true racism’ - what would untrue racism be like, one wonders? He implies that he is a racist, just not a ‘true’ one - and that feminists attack ‘men as rapists’. As white males imagine they are emasculated by feminism, Whites imagine they are no longer able to engage in Manifest Destiny because of anti-racism. LIke all racists, pedophiles & rapists, he simply wishes to peddle his nonsense without being punished for it.

The ultimate resentment here is that if those whom Whites consider non-people, with no rights Whites need to respect, get everything Whites get, then Whites will have lost something they can never get back, rather than the full rights and responsibilities of being fully human which Whites, for 500 years, have run away from. Whites will have lost the pseudo-Edenic childhood world where they could do as they please - without consequences - and are now forced to face the real world of adult responsibilities and pleasures. Whites accept the extra rights given them by White supremacy without complaint, yet refuse to accept the necessary responsibility for the victims of that White supremacy, nor the inevitable White guilt the very existence of such victims cause - except by whinging to their hearts’ content about not being able to bully people they do not like, legally.

Whites refuse to see that economics is the basis of everything - not their needy emotions - and that focusing on wealth-creation is the only way to create, protect and progress any culture wishing to remain viable.

Monday, 24 August 2015

Dear White Folks, Please Stop Being So ‘Surprised’ When White Cops Shoot Unarmed Black People

(2015)