[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Somone Else Always Loses: The Demographics of Political Correctness, Racism, and Reverse Discrimination We are told by those who garnish media coverage with their wealth and political status that race no longer matters. All people are the same. All are created equal. Differences are the figments of racist imaginations and unstable minds. While this socialist ideal seems altruistic, this ideal is an obvious challenge to some with a different personal or religious interpretation of "created equal" and its relevance or social reality based on their experiences. [In other words, some believe that "differences" in people are envoronmentally based, and others believe people start with different "codes." Since this is not the point of this article, I will not seek to illuminate every point for the "non-perceptive" reader.] The "created equal" ideal, which has been skewed to mean "equal results," also forms the justification for the perpetuation of future more "justified" racial biases, preferences and actions which, after the passage of time, have become accepted as valid and good means to correct the level of perceived injustice. In other words, one evil [by their own definition] deserves another. We are also told, that racism and discrimination still exist, which is the premise upon which race quotas and hate crime laws are built. Conveniently, however, those who gain from such policies forget that for every winner there is a loser. For every person promoted to a job or an institution of learning above someone else with a better record, someone loses. In other words, the race industry has become an institutionalized and accepted means of legalized theft from others, as well as socially accepted outlet for a not too veiled reverse discrimination. It has also led directly to the acquisition of power, wealth and priveledge by those who call themselves "leaders" to the so-called "minority community." The positions from which these "leaders" profited are morally bankrupt. Dr. Walter Williams was the first person from whom I'd heard the concept of "legalized theft." Most of those on this forum are already familiar with Dr. Williams and his concept and the libertarian ideals he espouses, such as the right to discriminate in our own choices and rights, when those rights do not require any obligation upon someone else, such as the rights to free speech and association. When legislated pseudorights such as quota agendas and welfare are examined, they confer discriminatory obligations upon others, usually the descendants of those thought reponsible for historical injustices. These policies, once accepted by society, become part of the cycle, along with media propaganda of ommissions and commissions, which propagates another cycle of institutionalized racism for future generations against a new, but fictional, perpetrator, which relieves the practitioners and beneficiaries from guilt. The Annual Assessment Report of the Homeless to Congress by HUD is a shining example of institutionalized racism in media, and its obvious propaganda purpose. The report states on page 14 "Homelessness also disproportionately afflicts minorities" and goes on to quote facts. While exposing [perhaps unintentionally] the societal anti-male bias from which the enresolved issue of homelessness perpetuates itself [after all they're men, they can take care of themselves, they deserve it for being failures, etc. Few realize, sadly, the large number of children who are homeless], the authors expose their own bias againt the ethnic group from which the other 41% of the homeless are derived. Whites are the 41% majority deemed somehow less important. [CBS News 11 Dallas: "The majority, 48%, of the homeless in Fort Worth are white." 10April07 report] When an author of color, like Secretary of HUD Alphonso Jackson, who would never admit to being a racist, makes an exception of "minorities" in a report which alledgedly seeks to rectify the problem of homelessness, which truly crosses all racial boundaries, it exposes institutional racism at it's best, along with the now fully accepted propaganda by which it is accompanied. Racial profiling of society's victims is an obscene affront to those affected by the problem and man's better instincts. By singling out certain groups, we discard and insult someone else, as well as falsely build up [in the eyes of society] those we have designated as somehow special by virtue of our special considerations. [The sin of pride. This is the exact stated reason why a famous ex-coach at Baylor University refuses to this day to state the names of athletes that he most enjoyed working with.] Rather than to stoop to such obvious levels of hypocrisy and badly veiled racism, it would be my wish, as it was Dr. Martin Luther King's, that color really no longer mattered. Sadly, Dr. King's words have been misused for nefarious reasons by those of ill intent to create an industry which feeds and profits upon reverse discrimination and outright racism, badly disguised as something else. Someone else always loses.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#3. To: IndieTX (#0)
Implicit institutional racism is not only not wrong, it's unavoidable. People and groups really are different, and it is highly unlikely (IMO) that a set of laws that has no disparate impact can be devised. The only question is whose values / propensities will be implicitly supported by law. As a white guy, I would naturally prefer these to be those of whites. Arguably, white values are implicit in law today, as whites tend to have little sense of peoplehood, relatively speaking, tending not to value themselves as members of a people. It's an interesting self-destructive reinforcement schedule, in which white individuals are rewarded individually, in the short term, for behaviors that are inimical to the group's long term survival. Possibly, whites have a flaw that became fatal after the technology they invented facilitated vast breeding by others and mobility everywhere.
Maybe we just don't like each other. ;) We don't like crowds nor do we stand as close to each other as many other cultures. Of course, I see this as cultural not racial, but whatever. Americans don't like to join clubs, which isn't very helpful. And leaving everything to the first born while the rest go with almost nothing has helped start many migrations. Then there's the food, why stay?
I've never joined clubs, I like having my few friends I'm close to, rather than hanging out with groups.
#7. To: Diana (#6)
I think whites are as group oriented as any demographic, but there is a broad spectrum of whites who increasingly fall into the group into which you and I fit - people who avoid group identification. At colleges, we used to be called the GDIs - the God Damn Independents. I abhor group think, and think it's not thinking at all.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||