When does pride in your race cross the line?

[genero81]

All I know is white conservatives with traditional values are still the majority in the U. S. Total control of the media means that young people will grow up thinking along the lines of this intentioned program for a new social reality. In the meantime, white conservatives must be maligned and countered by all means necessary.

After that is accomplished who knows? It wouldn't surprise me if racial identity is replaced fully by individual freedom of identification.

Not that I think things will get that far before some major event beyond human efforts comes into play.

 

[PaleFace]

The critical race theory is like the Covid, a social virus.

I totally agree, it's time for White people to start developing a healthy racial consciousness and fighting back against the anti-White CRT shills.

 

[PaleFace]

All I know is white conservatives with traditional values are still the majority in the U. S.

Sadly, this is barely the case. If we look at the demographics of the 25 and under crowd in America, its already majority non-White. Also theres a significant proportion of Whites who are afraid of identifying as White and still cling to ideas of racial blindness and universalism. This is especially prevalent among the the older generation who believe in the MLK narrative and the anti-White propaganda spewed by the media. I know many Republican types who start panicking when you mention racial differences to them. The youth, who had access to the free flow of information on the internet and who feel the vice of diversity closing in around them are more likely to be consciously pro-White.

 

[psychegram]

All I know is white conservatives with traditional values are still the majority in the U. S. Total control of the media means that young people will grow up thinking along the lines of this intentioned program for a new social reality. In the meantime, white conservatives must be maligned and countered by all means necessary.

After that is accomplished who knows? It wouldn't surprise me if racial identity is replaced fully by individual freedom of identification.

I expect you're correct. Once the Great Reset has converted the Earth into the World Hive, the racial divisiveness will have served its purpose, and the hive creatures will be encouraged to identify with nothing beyond themselves. Total breakdown of group identity is necessary to achieve maximal atomization, such that there is nothing between the individual and the hive.

It actually rather reminds me of the entire thrust of the STS societal dynamic, whereby total individual focus on the self leads not to liberation, but to society collapsing into a rigid pyramidal hierarchy in which, since each individual serves only the self, all exploit all and all are therefore exploited by whoever is higher in the pyramid.

The transgender madness seems to be an early step in this process, in which individuals are encouraged to adopt a fluid identity that is 'liberated' from biology. The endless proliferation of bespoke gender identities logically terminates in as many "genders" as there are people. Next step: transracial (already happening), then trans-species or "transhuman".

 

[United Gnosis]

Except the complete opposite is true and MLK especially is lionized by all sides of the political spectrum ad nauseum and the cult of MLK is literally above reproach and will land you in hot water if you dare point out the uncovered 2019 documents that Psychegram mentioned above. A simple test for anyone who says I'm lying: Go on social media or to your job or into a cafe and say the truth about MLK and watch as you become absolutely destroyed for life.

The recent date is relevant because it comes in a historical period in which MLK has been essentially deified, with the US government generally and the FBI specifically being quite committed to woke ideology. Had the claims originated back in the 60s, there'd be a better case for their having been fabricated with the intent of discrediting him. But then why release them now, and not decades ago?

I'm afraid that both of you hold a perspective of MLK that is now obsolete. That perception is well over a generation old now. Intersectionalists now consider MLK to be an internalized white man. He refused to look at color and they call that color blindness racist and white supremacy because it prevents the identitarian activists from claiming revenge on racial grounds. MLK is the enemy of the modern, dissociated intersectional left. Therefore it is not a suprise at all that his character is being destroyed now but not 10-20 years ago.

Go and try to praise MLK on FB, saying that he was a great man because he didn't want to look at the color of the skin. I predict you'll get banned for hate speech withiin the hour.

 

[PaleFace]

Go and try to praise MLK on FB, saying that he was a great man because he didn't want to look at the color of the skin. I predict you'll get banned for hate speech withiin the hour.

If you try and wield MLK like the ring of power from LOTR against the people who created him and the mythos around him in the first place, you will fail, of course. You cannot use the weapon of the enemy against the enemy.

But if you use MLK to further attack and denigrate whitey, you'll be alright.

The common criteria here is "is it bad for whitey". If it is, it's allowed. Simple as.

 

[psychegram]

I'm sorry, but that is no longer the case. That perspective is well over a generation old now. Intersectionnalists now consider MLK to be an internalized white man. He refused to look at color and they call that color blindness racist and white supremacy because it prevents the identitarian activists from claiming revenge on racial grounds. MLK is the enemy of the modern, dissociated left. Therefore it is not a suprise at all that his character is being destroyed now but not 10-20 years ago.

Go and try to praise MLK on FB, saying that he was a great man because he didn't want to look at the color of the skin. I predict you'll get banned for hate speech withiin the hour.

A very good point. In fact, if you examine the current discourse, it tends to be (generally white) American conservatives who defend MLK. I haven't seen much from the left attacking MLK specifically (I could have missed it), but they do react quite strongly against the 'content of one's character' dictum. It's certainly an interesting inversion of what would have been the case even a couple of decades ago.

 

[PaleFace]

it tends to be (generally white) American conservatives who defend MLK.

Ah, the eternal conservative. Yesterday's extreme liberalism is today's conservatism.

How principled of them!

Now we have the CONSERVATIVE MAGA tranny running for governor in California, as opposed to their LIBERAL trannies who want to raise taxes on us!

 

[luc]

As to the individual mattering, that's a big "yes, but". Obviously every group is a statistical distribution, and there will be high functioning outliers in any group, such that a member of group A that generally scores lower in metric X than group B may score higher than most members of group B, despite the average member of group B scoring higher than the average member of group A.

I think the point about the individual is not to deny that there are statistical group differences, but that we should look at individuals and not get caught up in "group think" - which is precisely what the identity politics people are so obsessed about. Going "White Supremacy" because of IQ stats is just playing the same identity politics game.

This is just a general property of Gaussian distributions. It follows that individual people should indeed be assessed as individuals; however, it also follows that aggregate group behavior and performance will also differ.

Yes of course, at least in some regards, but that's it. Not much more can be said about it. The problem begins when you think of *yourself* as superior because you are white. (Not saying that you personally think that.) This is why the individual counts, not the group. I can be a total idiot whether I'm black or white. It's about individual merit, period.

The over-emphasis of individual differences, while forgetting group differences, is behind the mania that is tearing society apart right now, since by insisting on something that isn't true - all groups are the same - it follows that any difference in group outcome can only be due to discrimination or oppression.

I think you got something mixed up a bit here. There is a massive over-emphasis on group, in fact the whole identity politics shtick is based on a denial of individual merit. This then leads to the wrong assumption that every group should be represented equally (equality of outcome) AND that it's only racism that explains differences in group outcomes. But note that "individual merit" is a much broader concept than "IQ". That is to say, I think we don't really need IQ distribution much to explain inequality of outcome when comparing groups, because there are tons of other factors involved, such as culture (wasn't there some study showing that some black groups in the US that are not African-American actually do pretty well?), conscientiousness, family situation (both parents present or not) and so on. For me, this whole black vs. white IQ thing is a side issue and designed to trap people who are rightfully fed up with left-globalist nonsense into obsessing about race, ironically just as the crazy-left does.

 

[PaleFace]

Going "White Supremacy" because of IQ stats is just playing the same identity politics game.

Caring about your people and standing up for them when they are under attack is not White Supremacist. There are no Supremacists that I am aware of. Just masses of poor, unrepresented, demonized Whites begging to be left alone by the jackals.

It's about individual merit, period.

You and I inherited a language, a culture, so much intangible and tangibles from previous generations. To deny this and ascribe all that success to oneself is the peak of modern narcissism. I have the humility to admit that I stand on the shoulders of giants who sacrificed so much for me to have what I have and not squander it away.

in fact the whole identity politics shtick is based on a denial of individual merit.

Tucker Carlson said it best: no other groups are targeted, just Whites. Diversity, Identity Politics, CRT is all just code for Anti-White.

this whole black vs. white IQ thing is a side issue and designed to trap people who are rightfully fed up with left-globalist nonsense into obsessing about race

Seeing as the Blacks are going absolutely insane and burning down cities and crime has soared by about 300%, and mass migration hasn't stopped for a second even though we supposedly are in the middle of an epidemic, and the prisons were literally opened as they were prior to the Bolshevik revolution, I think that the people who want to pretend this ISNT happening are the ones who have a blind spot, not the other way around.

Oh yes, and what about the military and the Deep State literally talking about targeting and hunting down "White Supremacist" trump voters? But perhaps that's all just a side issue.

 

[psychegram]

I think you got something mixed up a bit here. There is a massive over-emphasis on group, in fact the whole identity politics shtick is based on a denial of individual merit. This then leads to the wrong assumption that every group should be represented equally (equality of outcome) AND that it's only racism that explains differences in group outcomes.

What we're really dealing with is two unhealthy extremes. On one end, non-white immigrant groups in white countries are strongly encouraged to identify with their race and culture; to take extreme pride in that identity; and to ascribe any shortcomings in group performance to oppression by white majorities. On the other hand, whites are essentially prohibited from identifying with white heritage (at least in any positive way), while being indoctrinated to be full of guilt for the actions of their ancestors (or 'their' ancestors, as the children of Polish immigrants who arrived in the 1990s are told to be just as guilty about slavery and Jim Crow as those descended from the Southern aristocracy).

There's a healthy balance in the middle that is quite conspicuously discouraged by the elite. One should take a degree of pride in one's people, while also recognizing that one's people are imperfect, and also acknowledging the positive attributes of other groups (and for that matter, the negative attributes). In other words, one does not need to indulge in racial supremacism, or (to coin a term) racial inferiorism.

It's rather similar to a healthy attitude towards one's family and direct familial lineage. A healthy relationship is one where you love your family, take pride in their achievements, and acknowledge their imperfections. I'm grateful to my parents, grandparents, and on down the line for everything they did to make my life possible, and I seek to honour their sacrifices and achievements by living up to their examples. I naturally love my family more than I love other people's families; that doesn't at all mean that I want to murder other people's families, or that I think my family is the best family of all and should rule over and dominate every other family. It's simply my family, and I love them because they're my family, and that's that.

But note that "individual merit" is a much broader concept than "IQ". That is to say, I think we don't really need IQ distribution much to explain inequality of outcome when comparing groups, because there are tons of other factors involved, such as culture (wasn't there some study showing that some black groups in the US that are not African-American actually do pretty well?), conscientiousness, family situation (both parents present or not) and so on. For me, this whole black vs. white IQ thing is a side issue and designed to trap people who are rightfully fed up with left-globalist nonsense into obsessing about race, ironically just as the crazy-left does.

Of course there's more to group differences than IQ, and of course there's more to differences in IQ (and other traits) than raw biology. Nature/nurture is a false dichotomy and humans are complex animals. I don't think @PaleFace 's point was that IQ is the sole trait of relevance, but rather that group-level differences are quite real.

In my opinion, widespread acknowledgement and acceptance of these differences and their consequences would enable society to move forward in a far more harmonious fashion, in which we could stop obsessing about race and sex and every other immutable characteristic. As always, acceptance of truth leads to harmonization with universe; denying truth and embracing lies generates chaos. So it shouldn't be surprising that TPTB have put so much emphasis on demanding that everyone believe in the absolute equality of all groups.

 

[Seppo Ilmarinen]

The recent date is relevant because it comes in a historical period in which MLK has been essentially deified, with the US government generally and the FBI specifically being quite committed to woke ideology. Had the claims originated back in the 60s, there'd be a better case for their having been fabricated with the intent of discrediting him. But then why release them now, and not decades ago?

Personally I have no difficulty believing that the wise, kind, principled civil rights paragon MLK is a media-created myth that had nothing to do with the man himself. This would hardly be the first time in recent history in which an objectively odious individual was held up as an ideal. In fact, that's so common that the default assumption should be that if the power elite are pointing to someone as a hero, one should generally assume the opposite.

His image has been extraordinarily useful to the power structure, as it has facilitated a decades-long assault on the collective sense of self of European peoples, inculcating a pervasive ethnomasochism that has made Western countries much easier for the banking elite to dominate.

Perhaps, but just because MLK's image has been used by media to push some twisted agenda, doesn't make it his agenda. MLK was very anti-war and his famous speeches have very little to do with what today's Woke ideology represents. MLK was pain in the a** for the PTB, he was dangerous for them, and was assassinated because of that (and this process is well documented in the Evidence of Revision series). Of course the same people who murder dissident leader figures (who go against their political goals) 'deify' them afterwards in order to calm people down so they won't look too deeply about the event itself ('conspiracy theory'), and then deceive people to accept the official narrative behind the 'tragedy', which probably gives the PTB some sick satisfaction. Maybe it also gives them similar satisfaction to later 'undeify' them (and twist their image), when there is enough historical distance to the events.

For me, this whole black vs. white IQ thing is a side issue and designed to trap people who are rightfully fed up with left-globalist nonsense into obsessing about race, ironically just as the crazy-left does.

Indeed. One main goal with all of this liberal woke agenda is to trap people into playing the game of identity politics, and to 'choose sides'. This promotes PTB's agenda, and keeps people distracted, so they won't see the man behind the curtain. Only logical option is to not get obsessed by and not to participate in this nonsense.

 

[PaleFace]

Perhaps, but just because MLK's image has been used by media to push some twisted agenda, doesn't make it his agenda. MLK was very anti-war and his famous speeches have very little to do with what today's Woke ideology represents. MLK was pain in the a** for the PTB, he was dangerous for them, and was assassinated because of that (and this process is well documented in the Evidence of Revision series). Of course the same people who murder dissident leader figures (who go against their political goals) 'deify' them afterwards in order to calm people down so they won't look too deeply about the event itself ('conspiracy theory'), and then deceive people to accept the official narrative behind the 'tragedy', which probably gives the PTB some sick satisfaction. Maybe it also gives them similar satisfaction to later 'undeify' them (and twist their image), when there is enough historical distance to the events.

The truth does not fear investigation:

• Bayard Rustin was King’s main advisor and mentor/handler in the late 1950’s.
• Rustin joined the Young Communist League in 1936 and continued working with the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) until the early 1940’s.
• Rustin was a homosexual and was arrested in Pasadena, California in 1953 for committing sodomy in a car with two other men.
• Another one of King’s most trusted advisors was a Jewish New York lawyer named Stanley Levison - he was another leader in the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) in the 1950’s.
• Yet another of King’s advisors and a director of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference was Jack O’Dell. During the 1950’s O’Dell was a member of the CPUSA
• On October 10, 1963 Attorney General Robert Kennedy authorized the FBI to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Kennedy believed that one of King’s closest advisors was a top-level member of the CPUSA. The Kennedy brothers were both liberal, in fact you mentioned him as a paragon of virtue alongside MLK earlier in this thread. Ironic.

But lets cut to the chase, the Judeo-Liberal media protected MLK and created the myth around him:

Hoover and the Feds seem to have been genuinely shocked by King’s behavior. Here was a minister, the leader of a moral movement, acting like “a tom cat with obsessive degenerate sexual urges,” Hoover wrote on one memo. In response, F.B.I. officials began to peddle information about King’s hotel-room activities to friendly members of the press, hoping to discredit the civil rights leader. To their astonishment, the story went nowhere. If anything, as the F.B.I. learned more about his sexual adventures, King only seemed to be gaining in public stature. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act passed Congress, and just a few months later King became the youngest man ever to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Source: New York Times

They brag about it now that the cats out of the bag, and that the masses have been brainwashed to love MLK. No matter what I prove about him, his orgies, his drug use, his communist connections, his support from organized Jewry, it won't matter to the already indoctrinated mind.

Sure, he was assassinated, but he was more useful as a martyr anyways. Besides, he had started asking uncomfortable questions about the Palestinian situation and refused to endorse the Zionists. This was seen as a betrayal after all that the Jews had done to help him. Funny that. JFK was opposed to Israel getting nukes about the same time he was killed as well.

There's your "man behind the curtain" by the way. I prefer the term, "man in the kippah" though.

 

[PaleFace]

One main goal with all of this liberal woke agenda is to trap people into playing the game of identity politics, and to 'choose sides'. This promotes PTB's agenda, and keeps people distracted, so they won't see the man behind the curtain. Only logical option is to not get obsessed by and not to participate in this nonsense.

The Judeo-Liberal agenda is to wipe out the White race. So the only logical option is to fight back against the anti-White hate campaign by promoting a healthy and positive White identity. If you are being beaten to a bloody pulp, is the only logical option to not do anything and pretend it isn't happening?

The levels of hate in the Judeo-Liberal mass media are approaching Rwandan Hutu v Tutsi levels. This is simply not deniable. But hey, why didn't anyone tell the Tutsi's to stop being racist for point out that they were getting slaughtered? That would have solved it, I'm sure!

They are coming for Whites. They sense blood in the water. They march with signs and chants that literally say "Kill Whitey" and have been doing so almost every weekend since 2015. They've even got General Butt Naked out there now talking about how he's going to purge America of MAGA White Supremacists. But I'm sure he'll look past the color of all these free souls' skin and listen patiently as whitey quotes MLK at him and wags his finger about "the content of one's character" lol.

I am reminded of this quote by Solzhenitsyn:


Sorry, wrong one. I meant this one:



Whoops, sorry, still the wrong one.

Here it is:



They're going to start coming for regular White MAGA people and they're going to start throwing them into secret prisons. They already did so to the original Capital Protestors, even Sergei Lavrov and Vladimir Putin commented on this appalling behavior recently.

I am growing very suspicious of people who claim that there isn't a collected White Genocide agenda taking place and who bleat about MLK and color blindness.

Either way, ignorance won't save them. They'll burn in the camps with the rest of the BadWhites all the same eventually.

The collective gravestone of the White race will read: "Hey, at least we weren't racist though." And the Chinese historians will make a note of that, I'm sure.

 

[United Gnosis]

The Judeo-Liberal agenda is to wipe out the White race. So the only logical option is to fight back against the anti-White hate campaign by promoting a healthy and positive White identity. If you are being beaten to a bloody pulp, is the only logical option to not do anything and pretend it isn't happening?

No, the winning move is not to play. Identity politics is absolute spiritual cancer in all cases. I'm not going to promote an 'identity' I know to be a superficial sociocultural concept and far from any type of real Identity.

Exoteric people describe the personalized narrative they witnessed, the fuel of their experiences that colors their interpretations of ongoing life experiences, as 'identity'. Things like color, sex, gender identity, etc. That's the experience their perceived - the movie they've been watching. By definition, not an identity, an identity is real and never changes.


The real Identity is the movie screen the movie is projected onto, the consciousness witnessing the experiences. Self-concepts and definitions are inherently limitative and thus cannot apply to your actual Self. Exoteric people do not understand that and keep defining themselves through such dissociated individual 'identities'. And then they stack group 'identities' on top, which are another layer of dissociated, intellectual self-concepts being identified with. Spiritual cancer squared. The effect is to limit the direct channel between your true Self and its manifestation. No thank you.