Category Archives: Whites

In Support of Prejudice

I just found out that prejudice means “dislike for a group of people.” This typically means a racial, ethnic, religious, gender, sexual orientation or sexual identity. Prejudice usually means bigotry of some sort, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, sectarianism, and various forms of ethnic hatred.

For the life of me, I cannot see what on Earth is wrong with not liking some group of people. However, I would argue that this should be limited to dislike, it should not be obsessive and it should not be the sort of hot or cold hatred that hurts a lot of people.

This boils down to a basic limitation of freedom. Saying that prejudice is illegal or immoral or bad in some way is automatically an abrogation of human freedom. Obviously, we don’t have to like anyone. Isn’t that clear? Obviously, we can dislike anyone we want to, for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason at all. That is our right as a free citizen.

We have a right to our preferences. We have a right to have a preference for one particular group or a preference to not associate with some other particular group, although I would hope it would be phrased as,

“You know, I just don’t care to associate with [X group]. I wish them all the best and will work for equal rights for them because as humans they deserve it, but as far as I am concerned, it’s them over there and me over here. I simply prefer not to be around them too much and I do not wish to befriend them. If I have to deal with them, I will be as polite and friendly as possible, but I do not wish to take things any further than that.”

What in God’s name is wrong with such a mindset? Now obviously you cannot incorporate it into law. You cannot use your preferences to discriminate against certain groups in housing, employment, voting rights, etc. (even though such discrimination is rampant even now and is even officially sanctioned by a political party called the Republican Party). Sure, you can’t discriminate. But you don’t have to be friends with anyone. You don’t have to make the acquaintance of anyone. You don’t have to hang around with or associate with anyone.

I happen to have a certain dislike for some groups of people.

I am not wild about gay men, though I have a few online gay friends who I am very fond of. Friendships between gay and straight men are impossible in my book and fail every single time. How do I know this? Personal experience. I have also had a lifetime of bad experiences with gay men, and I just do not wish to deal with them anymore. I’ve had enough of gay men for one lifetime.

On their other hand, I support full rights for them, and I even work on their political campaigns! I support most of their political causes and in general think it should not be legal to discriminate against them.

But it’s still them over there, me over here, and never the twain shall meet. In my life, almost all straight men I have known have had little or nothing to do with gay men. I cannot think of anything more bizarre than straight men have gay friends, and the men I have known who befriended gay men almost always reported a catastrophic experience, bearing out my concerns. But then, I am Old School.

I don’t like Gypsies very much. In fact, I do not like them at all. I don’t hate them because they are not worth wasting my energy hating. I have met five Gypsies in my life. Four of them stole from me, and one just got out or jail. All were female. Based on that, I do not wish to meet anymore Gypsies in  this lifetime.

I’ve met plenty enough Gypsies for one life. As far as racism against Gypsies, it’s not something we deal with in the US, so it’s not an issue. It’s a nonexistent problem, so I have no opinion about it.

I don’t like Nigerians or Africans period very much, especially West Africans. I am done with them. Almost every African I met on the Net behaved horribly, and almost all of them tried to steal from either me or my friends.

We had a Yahoo group once and we let a lot of Africans, mostly Nigerians, into the group.

All except for one or two tried to steal from us.

A few others were trying to scam a White wife so they could get into the US. We called them wife-scammers and considered them to be about as low as the thieves.

The rest of them were always trying to chat with the women in our group. When the women would go talk to them, these men would have their cams on and would always be jerking their big Black cocks at these women, almost always White women. A number of our women got very upset by this, and some were out and out traumatized.

We threw almost all of them out of the group for stealing or trying to steal, wife scamming, and flashing and jerking off at our women without permission. We then put in a totally racist and discriminatory rule banning all Africans from joining the group.  We got accused of racism for this, and a lot of group members defected to go hang out with those wonderful Africans.

I suppose you think that because I am not fond of Africans, I dislike Black Americans. Actually, I have no particular opinion about Black Americans, and mostly I try to just not think about them, which I think is best. This is one group of Americans that I would say the less you think about them, the better.

Yes, we banned Africans from our group, but we also had a lot of Black Americans, men and women, in the group. Only one was banned, and he deserved it. The African ban did not apply to American Blacks. Why? Because they were not doing any of the things the Africans were doing! They were not stealing from us, wife scamming or jerking their dicks at our women.

In fact, the behavior of the US Blacks in our group was orders of magnitude better than the Africans! It was almost like we were dealing with two completely different races of people. This is why I think it is wrong to lump US Blacks in with Africans. Behaviorally, they are dramatically different, and US Blacks are much better behaved than Africans. I am not sure why this is, but I have some theories. As  you can see, theories of genetic race and behavior do not make much sense here, as US Black genes are not much different from African genes. What’s different? How about culture? How about 400 years of exposure to White culture here in the US?

I don’t have any particular preferences about any other groups of people, although to be completely honest, I suppose I am most comfortable with my own White people. I know that I am most comfortable with White women. I think it is just that they are most similar to me in many different ways. Also White women are far more likely to like me and want to get involved with me than are women of any other race. Why that is, I have no idea, but perhaps when it comes to dating and relationships, a lot of people simply prefer their own kind.

Which brings me to another type of preference. Why in God’s name can we not have racial or any other type of preferences when it comes to dating!? So you don’t want to date Catholics, or Arabs, or bisexuals, or transwomen, or Gypsies, or Gentiles, or atheists, or Nigerians, or, Hell, Midwesterners, or redheads, or people with blue eyes, or Republicans, or insurance salesmen, or banksters, or…anything or anyone for any reason or no reason?

I cannot think of anything more personal than dating, relationships, love, sexual behaviors, intimacy, and sex itself. The idea that we cannot have preferences or even actively discriminate in this area is absolutely insane, but we are starting to hear this now from the Cultural Left.

Apparently we men have no right to discriminate against transwomen in dating. As for me, sorry, I don’t date trannies. Real women are enough of a headache, believe me. I don’t need to deal with some chick who used to be a dude, sorry, I’m out as far as that goes.

Apparently, we White men are no longer allowed to say we prefer not to date Black women. We also cannot say that we do not find Black women attractive (a common belief among White men). I guess we have no right to have standards when it comes to attraction! The Cultural Left now says it is always racist for a White man to prefer not to date Black women, and it is always racist if a White man says he is not attracted to Black women.

I keep telling you that these Cultural Left freaks keep getting crazier every year. I think they are on some runaway Crazy Train. Apparently the nature of the Cultural Left is to get weirder and crazier every year, continually upping the ante and making more and more extreme demands. We meet a few of their nutty demands, and they don’t even bother to say thanks before they move the goalposts again and start making new even nuttier demands. It’s like a football field that stretches far off into the horizon with no end in sight.

13 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Civil Rights, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Discrimination, Homosexuality, Law, Left, Nigerians, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Roma, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites

The Alt Left View on Anti-Black Racism

Rambo: Saw you’re 10-6-17 post regarding some guy calling you a racist. Left the first comment about that. P.S. I happen to be a Black guy.

The real hardcore nasty racism against Black people bothers me. I do not mean just words and whatnot, but ugly words are still gnarly. It’s hard to argue that you’re not racist against Blacks when you care calling them niggers all the time like so many of these Alt Right types do. Used in a certain way, that is a very cruel word to use against Black people. It is nearly a slap in the face. It’s literally a fighting word.

Real discrimination against Blacks bothers me too. I am against discrimination! However, I would argue that disparate impact has to go, and affirmative action is not the way to deal with discrimination.

I am outraged at the way Blacks are having their right to vote taken away from them. It’s like we are back to Jim Crow.

It’s little known, but the Housing Rights Act is barely enforced at all. It’s a great law, the last of the great civil rights laws of the Second Liberation, but it’s toothless a lot of the time. They do have investigators they send out, and it is pretty simple to pick up discrimination, but they get constant budget cuts, especially when Republicans came in. Trump put this silly Tom named Ben Carson in charge of HUD, and one of the first things this House Negro said was that he would not enforce the Housing Rights Act.

Job discrimination has declined dramatically, but it’s still out there. Promotion discrimination is actually a more serious problem. The EEOC generally has good resources to fight this, and they do all the time. Good for them. The lawwuits are generally not abusive (though the disparate impact ones are) and most of the time, they are filing suit against some nasty policies.

Trump’s softer racism is starting to bother me too. When there are multiple people doing something he doesn’t like, he singles out the Black man and goes after him. And he seems to single out Blacks for attacks based on their behavior. This NFL flap feels racist to me. He just can’t resist any opportunity to bash Blacks. I think he is trying to win points with his racist base this way.

It is sickening that Jeff Sessions is now Attorney General. This is one nasty, ugly, old cracker White man from the South. He’s an unreconstructed Jim Crow type racist. His racism is raw and unmasked. They put this anti-Black racist cracker in charge of enforcing the laws of this land! Outrageous!

The modern antiracist movement of which many Blacks are a part of has gone completely bonkers and off the deep end. They have taken things way too far, and all they are doing is making people mad. Plus they are fighting for some very dubious things. Even worse, they are driving some formerly sympathetic Whites over to the overt racist side as the logic of the crazy debate is that you are with either the CRT kooks or the nasty racists, and there’s no middle ground. You have to side with one idiot or the other. It’s a game of Pick Your Fool.

But the correct response to the craziness and stupidity and even wicked folly of modern anti-racism is not be become a racist in response. The correct response is to say the Hell with the CRT Cultural Left antiracists and the Hell with the real racists too!

There’s nothing wrong with antiracism or better yet, nonracism. I like the word nonracism better than antiracism, as the modern version has poisoned the word to where it’s not even a good thing any more. Further, antiracism seems to mean that one must be consumed with a constant war against racism wherever it rears its ugly head. I don’t agree with that. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I have better things to do than to use up all my energy battling racist assholes.

Racism will never go away anyway, so in that sense the modern antiracists are either attacking windmills with spears, or worse, racism has become their very own White Whale. The best response is probably to line up with neither the antiracists nor the racist bastards and instead to simply drop out of the war. That doesn’t mean refusing to take a side. It means trying not to be racist yourself and opposing real racism at least in your mind while somewhat dropping out of the interminable war against the racist Leviathan.

But most of the principles of original Civil Rights Movement of Rosa Parks, the Little Rock Seven, James Meredith, SNCC, Martin and even late Malcolm are righteous things, and those values are still very much worth holding. The Alt Left in general upholds the values of the early Civil Rights Movement or what we call the Second Liberation, with a couple of exceptions for overreach.

13 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Civil Rights, Discrimination, Housing, Law, Left, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Republicans, US Politics, White Racism, Whites

Game/PUA: Differential Masculinity and Femininity Among Both Males and Females As a Rationale for Interracial Sexual Preferences

Let us look at the masculinity-femininity chart across races:

Masculinity In Men

Race             Masculinity Level 

Black men        Highest

Arab/Berber Men  Very High

Hispanic men     High

Polynesian men   High

White men        Medium

Amerindian men   Lower?

East Asian men   Low

Indian men       Lowest, but varies

 

Femininity In Women

Race                Femininity Level

Asian women         Highest

Arab/Berber women   Very high

Indian women        Very high

Hispanic women      Higher

Amerindian women    High

Polynesian women    High

White women         Medium

Black women         Low

Testosterone levels in both genders seem to correlate pretty well with gender and race above. The highest testosterone women are seen as the least feminine and the lowest testosterone women as the most feminine. The highest testosterone men are the most masculine, and the lowest testosterone men are the least masculine.

Masculinity/femininity, that inscrutable variable that the idiot Cultural Left wants to wipe off the face of the Earth – this is the goal behind the ludicrous “get rid of gender” and “everyone choose your own gender” campaign –  seems to be pared down to that most coarse and biological of things, the level of some certain invisible chemical coursing through our veins and brains. How boring. How prosaic.

The whole problem with these varying levels of masculinity and femininity is multiculturalism.

In India, Indian women think Indian men are just fine.

In Asia, Asian women think Asian men are just fine.

In isolation, males and females of each race seem to be perfectly happy with the opposite sex in terms of masculinity or femininity.

Now enter multiculturalism. Catastrophe.

Now men can compare the femininity of the various races of women. In general, men will choose the more feminine women over the less feminine women. Likewise, women will now be able to compare the masculinity of men cross-racially. They will tend to prefer more masculine men over less masculine ones.

This probably only goes so far.

Hence White women will pick Black men over White men because they are more masculine but will reject Asian women as less masculine. They will be comparing everything to the baseline of White men.

Asian women will choose White men over Asian men as White men are more masculine. However, Black men may be too masculine. Here you are asking to pair the most feminine women with the most masculine men. It may not work. Asian women may regard Black men as so masculine that they are uncivilized, animal-like brutes. After all, Asian societies are run on a certain level of highly civilized and controlled behavior, and Black men seem to violate that. Asian women probably want their men masculine but controlled, civilized and mannered.

Of all the races, Asians set the bar highest of all in terms of acceptable behavior. Many behaviors that are just fine in White culture are outrageously rude to Asians. Many Asian women are said to have a visceral hatred for Black men on the grounds that they are dangerously uncivilized and violent.

Asian men regard Black men as the nadir.

In Asian society, a man must support his children. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Asian men see Black men running around having eight kids by eight different women and not supporting any of them, and the Asian men are profoundly disgusted. To him, this behavior is barely even human. If asked, he will say that those Black men are acting like dogs. After all, male dogs simply run around impregnating any female dog who comes their way, and of course they don’t help raise the puppies. To be so far below human behavior that you are acting like a dog is profoundly repulsive and outrageous in Asian culture. It produces a nearly visceral response.

Black men probably like Asian women just fine, but those women are probably not available to them for the reasons above.

White men will use the baseline of White women to choose Asian women, as they are more feminine than White women, but they will reject Black women, as they are more masculine than White women.

Indian women, faced to compare White and Indian men, may well choose White men, as we are more masculine. As super-feminine women though, they may be outraged, offended and frightened by Black men, who they may well see as so masculine that they are brutal, violent, dangerous and animalistic. Indian society is highly mannered and the chaotic nature of many Black areas may be profoundly offensive to proper, dainty, fussy,  and submissive Indian women.

Indian and Asian men, faced with rejection by their women, may look elsewhere, but as the least masculine races among men, women outside those two races are going to see them as less masculine than their own kind. It’s their own women or nothing.

Black women ought to be just fine, but the problem is that many Black men are looking elsewhere, although Black men are quite happy with Black women. White women are more feminine than Black women compared to the Black baseline, so Black men’s desire for a White woman may just be a choice of a more feminized race of women.

Further, many Black women are incredibly loyal to their race and want Black men or nothing. Of course they prefer Black men, as they are the most masculine of all. Who wouldn’t? But what happens when they look elsewhere? White men seem a lot less masculine than the Black male baseline. That makes them a  lot less desirable for Black women because women’s choices tend to be towards more masculinity, not less. Further, as the least feminine of women, non-Black men are going to regard Black women as too masculine for them. Men’s choices will tend to be in favor of more feminine women and against less feminine ones.

Black women do not have a lot of choices outside their own men. For Black women, it’s Black men or nothing.

This dynamic even seems to be working with other races. There are reports that in Europe, White women are choosing Arab or Berber men over White men simply because they are more masculine. And in Argentina, Argentine White men are reporting that many Argentine women are leaving White Argentine men in favor of more masculine Hispanic mestizo men. There are reports that in Mexico, many White women are preferring macho mestizo brutes over mannered and affected White men.

As you can see,  Black women as the least feminine women and Asian and Indian men as the least masculine men get the short end of the stick. A Black woman/Asian man pairing would be bizarre. You are asking the most masculine women to pair with the least masculine men. Black women probably see Asian men as severe wimps. You are also asking the least masculine men to hook up with the most masculine women.  For an Asian man to date a Black must nearly feel gay, as if he is with a man. The people at the far ends of the spectrum are the least likely to choose each other.

10 Comments

Filed under Arabs, Argentines, Asians, Berbers, Blacks, Cultural Marxists, Culture, East Indians, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Hispanics, Mexicans, North Africans, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Romantic Relationships, Sex, South Asians, Whites

PUA/Game: Even in the Land of the Nerds, Women Still Probably Prefer Alphas

I spent a few days in Silicon Valley recently, mostly in Mountain View, where I spent four days. Mountain View was swarming with nerdy men of all races. Most of the White and Indian men there were quite nerdy. I would think that if you had great Game and you went to Silicon Valley, you might be able to clean up because so many of the men were such nerds, and you have to think that those women there are probably hungry for some Game-supercharged Alpha men, who seem to be in short supply.

Even in the Land of the Nerds, I am sure that most women still prefer Alphas. That’s just Mother Nature calling them home. They’re not even thinking about it or aware of it. It’s 40,000 years of evolution talking. In so many ways, we may as well  still be living in caves. We are not as different from cavepeople as we think.

7 Comments

Filed under California, East Indians, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, South Asians, USA, West, Whites

Alt Left: The Creation of a New Race in the US – a Black/White Converged Race

It must be that males across space and time have been specifically selecting for beauty in females. The less attractive females were apparently simply selected against.

We see this trend even in modern times as the Black phenotype in the US has remarkably merged with the White phenotype, but only from the late 1800’s on. The changes in Black skulls in the US from the 1870’s on are nothing short of miraculous. Some it is probably due to diet, but most of it seems to be due to pure genetics. At the same time, a remarkable change has occurred in the White phenotype in terms of selection against archaic features and for progressive features from the 1600’s to the present day such that White people now look more like Black people than they do like their very own Colonial ancestors.

We what we are seeing is a merger of the two races. We have already had the creation of the American Negro, almost a new race among Blacks characterized by more progessive features and greater beauty, fewer archaic features, increased intelligence (apparently genetic) and heavy White minority admixture. Yet US Whites are also creating a new race as they merge together with Blacks phenotypically. It is almost as if we are heading towards the creation of a new Black-White merged and somewhat mixed race here in the Americas. Some it is due to interbreeding, but much is also due to parallel development.

What happened what that after the First Liberation, Black men were probably finally able to be more selective in Black females. They selected for lighter skin and Whiter or at least more progressive features and against more archaic features. Black females were also able to be more choosy about men. As some Black men began to accumulate money and wealth (quite a bit of which could be accumulated in Black neighborhoods among the new Black professionals) women began selecting possibly for the most moneyed, prominent or powerful men.

This type of Black men has always been lighter-skinned and more White-admixed than other Blacks. Hence these men would have more progessive and fewer archaic features. It also seems to be a truism that archaic features as associated with lower IQ’s and more progressive features are associated with higher IQ’s. This is even true across racial lines and within races themselves. Mass Black selection for more progressive and Whiter features may have led to the increased IQ among US Negroes, which can only partly be explained by genetics. There may also have been some epigenetics at work here in the US.

4 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Biology, Blacks, Genetics, History, Intelligence, Physical, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, US, USA, Whites

The White Low Income, Working Class and Poor Are Not As Bad As You Think

Jason Y: Actually, though small towns are not as safe as you can get, unlike what Robert is saying. If you’re in the right area, you could very well get around poor Whites who are very little different than gangbangers. Their whole scheme is identity theft, plain old theft, and extortion (sometimes using their children to gain the sympathy of people).

They also exploit the liberal economic system (giving it a bad name among conservatives), basically getting all they can for free (via using children). Yet these same whites often hate NAM’s worse than the Klan.

Actually, I lived around many poor Whites up in the mountains for many years. Those rural White areas are full of poor and low income Whites. That’s mostly who lives there.

There was almost no crime among those poor and low income rural Whites up there. I was not aware of any identity theft. There was very little theft. We even had a bunch of homeless young Whites living out in the park, and none of them ever stole either. The one guy who stole was very stupid, the worst one out of all of them, and he happened to be half-Indian. I hate to say it, but that’s when I really started thinking about biology, race, and crime. There were all these poor as dirt people living around me, almost all of them young Whites, and the only one who stole anything was a damned Indian.

There were a lot of drugs in those towns too. Meth was everywhere. I actually knew a number of meth users and most of them were extremely nice people, believe it or not. There was not a lot of crime associated with meth up there for some weird reason.

I did see some serious crime relating to interpersonal fights. One guy I knew very well was very badly beaten in the head with a metal bar to the point of unconsciousness. He was screwing some woman, he was at her house, and someone came in and nearly beat him to death. It was thought that the guy who beat him was maybe the girl’s boyfriend. I figure there is going to be serious violence or even homicide related to interpersonal conflict everywhere you go.

One thing I noticed was that there were some extremely scummy people up there. We had some as neighbors for a while. But they were mostly just destructive towards themselves. Young men went to jail pretty regularly, but it was usually for drunk driving and sometimes for fistfights with other young men. One time we called the cops on the neighbors. They had a wild fight at 3 AM and smashed out the front window. Mostly they were just gross. They would do meth and play loud music all night and were always going to be balcony and spitting down below. A lot of the spit landed on the cars below. They were disgusting and we were starting to get pretty mad about their sheer grossness.

You could talk to those guys though, and I had some pleasant conversations with them. Some were missing teeth due to meth use. They were friendly enough if you were friendly to them. Actually some were remarkably friendly. It was sort of amazing how friendly they were. And these were the meth-heads.

A young woman later moved in got pregnant soon after. She hung out with some lousy people. She was known for borrowing small amounts of money, like $5-10, and then never paying it back. In that low income White culture up there, that is considered to be extremely scummy behavior. It’s considered to be “niggerish” behavior associated with low income Blacks and Hispanics. Low income Whites are expected to be better than that, and if you act like that, you are “acting like a nigger,” and a lot of those poor Whites will ostracize you.

There were others up there who sometimes borrowed say $25. They would pay it back later as a matter of principle, always with interest. That’s how deeply moral they were.

I think people fail to understand the deep moral roots a lot of the White lower and working classes have. You have to live around them a while to see it.

These poor, low income and working class Whites also have a pretty complex moral code about politeness and appropriate behavior. It’s pretty easy to violate their rules, which is considered to be rather serious, though it is often chalked up to ignorance. A lot of the rules are unspoken, and they are communicated to you by nonverbal means that are often very hard to understand. If you break a rule, people will act upset, but they will communicate it to you in strange nonverbal ways that don’t seem to make sense. You have to figure out that they are communicating a message to you in code, and you are supposed to figure out the code.

They’re  interesting people. One great thing to say to people like that is, “You sure got a real nice family.” That always goes over very well. You are not supposed to diss someone’s family.  That is considered to be very serious social violation. They place family pretty high up in moral order.

I was not aware of a lot of welfare fraud and abuse up there. Some of the young women were on welfare. My mother said that although there were many young single Moms up there, few of them were on welfare. She said that though the young White men would not live with or marry the mother and often they broke up with them, they often supported their children despite their low incomes.

Those poor, low income ,and working class Whites have a hardcore work ethic. You are supposed to work. Refusing to work and choosing instead to live off others is considered lowlife behavior. Many work long hours, sometimes at more than one job. Quite a few of even the meth heads that I knew worked regular jobs, sometimes up to 50 hours a week.  They worked at jobs like house painter, things like that.

I also noticed something else. We had very little crime up there until a lot of Hispanics started moving into the mountains. Quite a few of them were illegals. They did not bring a lot of crime with them, but soon after they moved up there, I heard that a lot of car stereos were being stolen. If you live around Mexicans in California, you will find that most are not dangerous or criminal at all, and it is pretty safe to live around them, with the exception that Mexicans steal car stereos and car hubcaps. A few years after I moved here, all four of my hubcaps were stolen. They were stolen slowly, like one every 9 months or so. They cost ~ $25 each. I consider that a small price to pay for living around these Mexicans. It’s not like you need hubcaps or they are unaffordable.

After I moved down to this Hispanic town, I noticed that poor Whites seemed to attack themselves or direct their aggression inwards towards self-destructive behaviors, which can get pretty gross. But they did not act aggressive towards others much. But I saw that poor Hispanics and Blacks were much more likely to direct their aggression outwards towards other people and victimize them. They often seemed to show little no guilt about victimizing other people. It was like there was nothing wrong with it. Often they got outraged and angry at the victims for getting upset about being victimized!

Poor Blacks and Hispanics also “set the bar much lower” as far as acceptable behavior was concerned.

The poor Whites set a bar as far as acceptable behavior goes. Below that, you are a scum.

The Hispanics seemed to set the bar of acceptable behavior lower, and they considered worse behaviors than the Whites to be nonetheless acceptable. They allowed one to engage in more bad behaviors before they would consider you a scum.

And I hate to say it, but the Blacks around here set the bar even lower than that – they set the bar the lowest of all. They always asked for loans, and they never paid them back, ever. They saw nothing wrong with this. They walked into your house and started pointing at things you own and demanding that you give that object to them. Or they came into your house, and when your back is turned, they steal your stuff. Mexicans did this too, but it’s mostly Black or half-Blacks who did it.

I have never had a White person come into my house and start demanding that I give them my possessions even one time. That is such a profound violation in White society, even poor White society, that I cannot  put it into words. You will be thrown out of the house and never allowed back in again. Furthermore, you will be called a “nigger,” as that behavior is associated with low class Blacks, and Whites are supposed to be above that.

In all my life, I only had people come to my house and steal my stuff once, and that was an 18 year old delinquent drug user, but I blew it with him because I went to get my stash of pills when he was in the room with his friends, so he saw where I kept it. He later stole a bunch of pills from my stash.

But in general, the idea that you invite someone into your home and they rip you off when your back is turned is so outrageous in White society that it is nearly unmentionable. Once again, it is considered “niggerish,” and you will in a sense be evicted from the White race for engaging in that behavior. Among a lot of Whites, saying “you act like a nigger” is an extreme insult (you might get hit), and even poor Whites will go to great extremes to avoid engaging in behavior that would earn them that insult.

11 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Crime, Culture, Hispanics, Mexicans, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites

Alt Left: Psychological Origins of White Gun Nut Culture

First of all, no matter what these rightwing liars tell you, gun culture is White culture. It’s rightwing White culture. It used to be mostly older rightwing Whites, but a number of younger Whites may be into it now too.

Gun nut culture is based in the South, Texas, the rural Midwest, West and East.

Blacks are not into gun nut culture, although I have heard that rural Southern Blacks love their guns. Urban Blacks are not part of gun nut culture other than the criminal class. I have some Blacks who live around me here, and none of them have guns.

Hispanics are not into gun nut culture. Yes, gangs and the criminal class have guns, but most others do not. I live in an Hispanic city right now. Almost all of my neighbors are Hispanic. I’ve never met one of them who had a gun. The only gun I ever saw was under the shirt of a 19 year old gangbanger.

Asian culture is not gun nut culture. They’re just not into guns.

American Indian culture is not gun nut culture. I worked for Indians for years in the mountains, and I got to know many of them. Never met an Indian who owned a gun.

South Indians are not a part of gun nut culture. This town is swarming with South Indians, and I’ve never met one who had a gun.

In general, urban Whites are not part of gun nut culture. Whites who live in big cities where crime is much higher than in rural areas usually do not have guns, although logically, they would have much greater reason for one. It’s not common to meet an urban White person who has guns in this state. Here in California, urban Whites in places like the Bay Area and LA generally do not have guns. In all the time I spent in LA and the Bay Area, I never met one urban White person who kept a gun.

A few White women have guns for personal protection. I doubt if it does much for the crime rate. I had a girlfriend who lived alone, and one night at 2 AM, she pulled a .38 out of a drawer and showed it to me.

“It’s loaded,” she told me.

There we were, standing there at 2 AM in this chick’s house, passing a loaded gun back and forth like it was nothing. She’s the only woman I ever met who had a person gun for protection.

That stupid gun you keep in your house is 30X more likely to be used to you or  someone in your house in a homicide or suicide than it is to defend you from a potentially lethal attack. It’s not worth it to keep a gun in your house. There’s no benefit, and there are huge risks of death associated with doing  that.

There is basically zero significant and potentially lethal violent crime in White rural America. It’s as safe as you can get.

I lived in a White town in the Sierra Nevada of rural California for 18 years. I got some news for you. There was zero crime there. None. No significant crime, certainly nothing you would need a gun to defend yourself against. And when I left there in 2005, I was still often not locking my door when I left. Why should I? Why lock the door?

What is most bizarre is that in this White rural town in lived in with no crime, guns were everywhere, and most everyone you met was a gun nut or gun kook. And they had no reason to have their guns.

The dirty little secret in California about the White mountains is that this is where Whites moved to get away from the “niggers and the Mexicans.” It was pretty common for them to come right out and admit that that was why they moved up there. It was also fairly common for them to say that the reason they were armed to the teeth was because Blacks and Mexicans were going to come up to the mountains in small armies and prey on moneyed Whites.

A fair number of them were White Supremacists who ranted and raved about rightwing conspiracy theories all the time. Most of these people were armed to the teeth, and many had stocked up years of food. They insisted that society was about to collapse any time now, and with the collapse, whole armies of “niggers and beaners” would drift up out of the crime-ridden cities into the White mountains to prey on the Whites.

One of their notions was that after the collapse, society would run out of food, and the White psychos who had been stockpiling food for years would be the only people in society with any food left, so starving hoards of armed “niggers and beaners” would drift up from the ruin and emaciated cities to steal the food of the Whites in order to survive.

I heard a number of these psychos outline for me how this was going to happen and how they were going to make a last stand for it in their barricaded mountain retreat piled with guns. They would hole up in the mountain base with a living room full of guns as the starving “niggers and beaners” flooded into the mountains to kill the Whites and steal their food. In their mountain abode, they would hole up with sniper rifles as the living dead Black and Brown zombies teemed below, hungry for White bodies and food. They would be up on the hill, firing down at the Orcs below. Most of them expected to die defending their mountain home from darkies.

Millions of White people actually believe this crap. Isn’t that incredible?

So there you have it. America’s gun culture is senseless, based on paranoia, racism and wild cataclysmic conspiracy theory. It doesn’t even have a rational basis.

14 Comments

Filed under American, Asians, Blacks, California, Conservatism, Conspiracy Theories, Crime, Culture, Hispanics, Political Science, Psychology, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Sociology, South Asians, West, White Racism, Whites

Indian Hindus – Portrait of a Parasitical People

Excellent post from the comments from Angie Cohen, a physician in New York City.

Angie Cohen: Bhabiji: This is going to be a lengthy post.

I have noticed that you have conveniently ignored a lot of Robert’s points in his post. Allow me to address them with facts and evidence. I will mention some of Mr. Lindsay’s points and address them vis-a-vis your convoluted rants defending Hinduism:

#1: Robert’s point on the sheer hypocrisy and hideousness of upper caste Hindus, especially the Brahmins.

He clearly mentioned their disdain for people whom they consider lower castes or “dalits,” while both defending the caste system, and when cornered with logic and facts, even denying the existence of Casteist- based discrimination and atrocities against lower castes by Brahmin & other upper caste thugs in India.

You seem to have ignored that and instead deviated to defending the evils of Puranic Hinduism and the idiotic mythical Ramayana rubbish.

#2: Robert’s point on the Brahmins’ hatred for Western culture and Christianity while glorifying a mythical idealistic ancient Hindu Vedic civilization extolling the superiority of Hindus vs the others (Christians, Muslims etc).

The Brahman-dominated Hindutvadi losers do all these while ironically doing everything they can to dump their failed Hindurashtra and then leave for Judeo-Christian-based secular nations such as the United States, Australia, UK, Canada and even some EU nations. That is a strange dichotomy. Almost a walking contradiction!

#3: Robert’s point on Hindu savagery and backwardness.

Despite what Brahmin supremacists love to claim online under anonymity or in some pathetic RSS/BJP/ Ultra rightwing Hindu club eulogizing the greatness of Vedic civilization and the genius of the upper caste Hindu mind, all evidence points to quite the opposite.

Show me ONE place, just one place on Earth where Hindus (upper castes or otherwise), despite being easily able to congregate together (Heck they have a whole freaking nation for themselves, i.e. Modi’s Brahman-dominated upper caste-run India – a failed shithole!) have been able to build a decent or successful society which is both fully functional and advanced. Pretty sure there is NOT one.

The Evidence:

What do White Christians create in terms of advancement & beauty?

The holiest sites for Hindu Brahmans – Varanasi & River Ganges created, maintained, and run by Hindu Brahmins, is the utopia we create and then delude ourselves of our supposed superiority.

Brahman-supported Hindu Supremacist leader Modi’s beloved Gujarat – we do believe in Rupee for Poopee!

Hindu dominated India’s staggeringly low IQ:

Hindu-dominated India has a very low IQ of just 82, far lower than ANY Western nation (North & South Americas, Europe, Russia, Australia & New Zealand). This point explains Indian incompetence in the medical and technical fields, which is why we the western world have to pretty much share all our science, technology & civilization with these arrogant ingrates.

http://www.searchindia.com/2016/04/28/are-indian-h1bs-low-iq-chutiyas/

Hindu incompetence in the engineering and tech fields:

http://www.gadgetsnow.com/jobs/95-engineers-in-india-unfit-for-software-development-jobs-claims-report/articleshow/58278224.cms

Hindu incompetence in the medical field:

From Great Britain – incompetent Hindu doctors wrecking havoc there:

http://www.unz.com/article/bad-medicine-the-sickening-truth-about-britains-foreign-doctors/

Not only are they highly incompetent in their technical work, they have this brash, arrogant attitude mixed with a rude demeanor which makes them very unwelcome here. Not just the IT sector filled with unintelligent Hindu zombies, but even the medical industry has suffered the plague of Hindu incompetence. A few years back the Australian government suffered the outcome of inviting one such upper caste Hindu, Dr. Jayant Patel, who would turn out to break the world record for the highest number of cases of death and medical negligence owing to his sheer medical incompetence. He was labelled “Dr. Death” by the media which made his horrible work into international headlines.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/General/The-scandal-of-Dr-Death/2005/05/27/1117129900672.html

Even in India, take a cursory look at the number of so called medical doctors who have been banned or jailed for medical incompetence and negligence by the Medical Council of India – all happen to be upper caste Hindu doctors. Just look at the list below – excepting one random Muslim name, it pretty much reads from a telephone directory of some Hindu Brahmin or Baniya matrimonial column from New Delhi. It is interesting to note that NOT one Indian-Christian doctor made it in that shitlist of shame.

Now ask yourselves this question: Why does America, UK or Australia need more incompetent upper caste Hindu doctors or technocrats when it is plainly evident that these losers can’t hack it in terms of quality?

Just so that you know, the minority of Indian Christians still stuck in India are easy targets for persecution by the upper caste-dominated Hindu fascists of the ruling BJP government. The Indian Christian community is a highly intelligent, educated and industrious lot who have actually helped advance India into the 21st century. The Hindu fascists are the same folks who burnt alive and killed an Australian Christian man and his two young sons for helping poor & maligned leprosy patients in Orissa, India.

The Indian Christian community is actually a breath of fresh air here in the West. They are nothing like their Hindu countrymen. Generally highly competent, intelligent and very well-assimilated into Western culture, they are welcome here anytime. Can’t say the same for the Hindus, Sikhs, and especially the savage Muslims though.

angelinamendes87.wixsite.com/indianchristians

Studies and statistics like those listed above should be shared and shown to official authorities and friends, colleagues, and families – just so we can all be secure in the knowledge of making an astute decision as to the current immigration trends.

Conclusion:

Indians, especially the Hindus, are highly parasitical. If and when some among them thrive or are successful, at best they migrate to somebody else’s land, neighborhood or club built, designed and created by someone else. Thus for all the spikes and bile they upper caste Hindu losers spew against Christendom, they are the first bunch of parasitical hypocrites who crawl on their rancid bellies and beg, borrow, or steal to dump Hindu India (Bharatvarsh) & instead migrate to Christian lands in the West.

And once there, these ingrates will do everything they can to undermine the host culture and people vis-a-vis their concomitant attacks against Christianity, our institutions, our jobs and especially against our women and culture. Unlike the Muslims, the Hindus are a lot more sly and do these acts in a covert manner. Except that people are waking up to their BS.

These Brahman hypocrites will steadily vote for the Left in Western countries while steadfastly supporting ultra rightwing policies and governments back in their homeland of India. Another walking contradiction.

So, if Hinduism is so great, “Bhabiji”, tell me when you book the next one-way ticket to “the enlightened land of Bharatvarsha” (India) and live, thrive and work in Hindustan without returning back to us inferior Jews & Christians of the West?

88 Comments

Filed under Asia, Australia, Britain, Christianity, Conservatism, Culture, Death, East Indians, Europe, Fascism, Health, Hinduism, Immigration, India, Intelligence, Legal, Medicine, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asia, South Asians, USA, Whites

Everyday Background Racism in America

DIaZkR-UwAASsD_

Face it, this is flat out racism.

This is the sort of thing the SJW anti-racists talk about when they talk about the normality and banality of everyday racism in the US. I hate SJW anti-racists and pretty much want them all dead, and they drastically exaggerate this problem.

Nevertheless, there is something to what they are saying. There is a certain amount of background normative quotidian racism against Blacks in this country. The reason for that is that way too many Black people act bad, but that’s no excuse for unfair captions like you can see above. The SJW’s and really any decent American would be correct to point out the glaring racism in the captions above. It’s just not right.

Note that the White people didn’t steal the food, they “found” some food in someone’s else’s grocery store! Sure wish I could find some food in my local grocery store and walk out the door with it! Presumably these heroic White people were just taking that food so they could have something to eat and survive. What are they supposed to do, wait until the stores open again? Note also that the Whites are residents, that is, they actually live in the neighborhood.

The Black on the other hand, is simply a youth. He is not described as a resident, though surely he is. The suggestion is that he does not live there and instead is simply some outsider who invaded the area to steal from local residents and their businesses.

And note that whereas the Whites just innocently happened on some food that someone left out for the taking, this Black kid was actually evil enough to steal some food. He stole it from a flooded out grocery store where most everything will be thrown away, but he’s still a thief. You know how those Black people are, always stealing. Presumably this Black kid has weeks worth of food back at home, undamaged by the flood, and he stole this food not because maybe he was hungry (probably the real reason) but just to be a sinister thieving sociopathic Black natural born criminal.

People call the Alt Left racist all the time, but I would say that the Alt Left is very much against this sort of unfair journalism. It’s just not fair. And if it’s not fair, the Alt Left is against it, as a general rule.

21 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Blacks, Civil Rights, Cultural Marxists, Journalism, Left, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Sociology, USA, Whites

Is It Okay for Me to Want to Have a Gay Best Friend but Not Like Lesbians?

Answered on Quora.

Watch this answer get downvoted to Hell. I have answered quite a few questions regarding homosexuality, and while I was very careful not to come across anti-gay in my answers, I pretty much just told it like it is about gay men because I know them very well having lived and worked around them for years. Almost every single question I answered on gay men got downvoted to Hell by fags. And fags apparently mass reported me to Quora for “homophobia.” The site warned me after each post that if I persisted in my evil homophobia they were going to ban me. That site is so PC, SJW and Cultural Left that I am thinking maybe they should just call it Queera and get it over with. I mean why all the pretense?

This is getting ridiculous. Gay men are getting as bad as Blacks and Jews. Everything’s homophobia I guess. They see insults everywhere, and you can’t say anything about them unless you are praising them to the skies. I guess it makes sense though because gay men are perfect, right? They are immaculate angels that all us guys need to imitate because of their ultimate perfection and excellence. There’s nothing bad about them. Even their shit doesn’t even smell.

It’s already like this with the exalted Jews, who are of course the most perfect humans on Earth and have never done anything bad in 2,000 years. If you say one bad thing about them, the Jews will hound you to Hell and back for the rest of your life. And well they should, for how dare you imply there is anything wrong with God’s most perfect people!

And then there’s Muslims. There is no group of people as perfect and special and amazing as Muslims. I mean, these humans are so amazing that they can everything but fly! Hell, maybe they can fly. You never know what those amazingly great Muslims have up their sleeves in terms of hidden talents. I mean we can bash Christianity and Christians to Hell and back because it’s mostly White people practicing that religion. Anything mostly White is obviously evil.

But Islam is practiced mostly by those tan and browner people. Everyone knows that the browner the person, the more perfect and special they are. All us lowly Whites should try to be as perfect as those most excellent brown people! I honestly believe that brown people never do anything wrong, and of course there is nothing to criticize about them. Anyway if you do, it’s Islamophobia, and that means you are pure evil, worse than Hitler.

Of course! In fact, this describes almost all straight women. Most straight women are not real keen on lesbians or lesbianism, and most prefer to avoid lesbians if they can help it. I have never met one straight women with a “lesbian friend.”

Furthermore, lesbians don’t seem to want to hang out with straight women. Lesbians and straight women don’t hang out together. Lesbians hang out with other lesbians and gay men. That’s all they wish to be around.

Straight women hang around other straight women, heterosexual men (for sex and romance), and gay men (for nonsexual male friendship).

Straight men hang out with other straight men and straight or bi women. I have never met a straight man with a lesbian friend, and most straight men my age do not have gay friends. I find the idea of straight men having gay friends to be bizarre.

Most straight women of a certain age have or have had a gay friend or more than one gay friend. Gay men and straight women often get along extremely well.

On the other hand, straight women are usually wildly homophobic about the men that they date, and they do not wish them to be even .0000001% gay. I have a couple of completely straight male friends who told me they had sex with men a time or two on an experimental basis (this is actually very common). They made the mistake of telling their girlfriends that they had done this, and the women went through the roof, screaming every gay slur you could possibly think of. “Faggot! Queer! Fag!” It went on and on. They were like Mike Pence on steroids. One guy told me that for a year or two after they broke up, she kept sending him texts and leaving him phone messages like, “You faggot! You fucking queer! You fag! You’re such a queer!”

And these women were very supportive of gay rights and had gay friends. In fact, my friends told me that they had to be OK with gay men to even date these women, as these women were the “I don’t date homophobes” type. Both friends were homophobic towards gay men, but they had to tone it down if they wanted to get any sex.

It is almost boringly pedestrian and normal for straight women to like to have gay friends but to be very dubious and distant when it comes to lesbians. I’m not sure if they dislike lesbians so much as they really don’t want much to do with them.

4 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Islam, Jews, Race/Ethnicity, Religion, Ridiculousness, Sex, Whites, Women