Felix Volkbein
07-21-2014, 01:56 AM
I'm going to use this thread to highlight great comments I've spotted in the comments section of various websites dealing with race and racial issues.
No, none of these are my own. If the thoughts and opinions are similar to ones expressed by me on this board, it's because my views are firmly reality-based and not that uncommon once people are freed from the manacles of PC censorship.
From "silviosilver":
"Opie and Anthony know the score. A few years ago they gave a favorable mention to Niggermania which saw a huge influx of new visitors to that site. In my view, the devastation caused by the nigger animal is far and away the most vulnerable chink in the armor of the racial status quo, which is why so many resources are committed to propping it up. "Telling the truth about racial differences" is far from all that is necessary to make a decisive pro-white political impact, but the difference between niggers and, well, everyone else is so enormous that it's madness not to exploit it. This is particularly so because the kind of nigger the average middle class white (or middle class anything, for that matter) is likely to interact with is unquestionably miles above the typical savage that infests the 'hood, so in combination with the absurdly unrealistic media representation of blacks these people have a wildly inaccurate impression of what the presence of large numbers of niggers implies for a community."
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2014/07/05/anthony-cumia-of-opie-anthony-radio-show-fired-sirius-xm-for-violating-the-standard/
"It's very frustrating. I have every reason to believe there are uncountable whites who understand full well the meaning of blacks and their typical talk. I overhear such sentiments voiced all the time. It's very much a myth that whites are totally clueless about racial issues, at least among the working classes. But that sentiment so far has not translated into concerted social action, not even - as you suggest - banding together for self-defense against even the most obvious of anti-white provocations.
Before we judge, however, we should be mindful of the cultural considerations that tend to constrain whites. Firstly, there is not a pervasive sense of white cultural identity. Whites tend to "know they are white," but it's a "negative" identity, the result of not being anything else - a "boring," plain old "white boy" (gah, I hear this "identity" being volunteered more and more in non-racialist conversation). Secondly, even when whites have a positive identity - when they're White and they know it and they like it - it's an identity better "sensed" than it is "understood." That's to say white identity is unsure of itself, what its borders are and what such an identity signifies and implies; and needless to add, such an identity in today's world is always on the defensive, justifying and apologizing for itself rather than being taken for granted.
The result is that whites are profoundly unsure of themselves when it comes to acting as whites. On numerous occasions I have witnessed whites being treated roughly and - frankly, despite myself ("it's not my business") - I have felt a tremendous urge to step in and attempt to even the odds. This urge has been most notable when the incident has involved blacks, the group that invariably triggers my racial instincts most viscerally. I have so much wanted to wade in without regard to "who is in the right," but I have been held back by the knowledge that: (a) society in general would emphatically not take my side if it came down to a legal judgment; and (b) that the individuals involved would in all likelihood disavow my involvement rather than express gratitude for it. It's quite the conundrum."
http://www.amren.com/features/2014/07/how-i-learned-the-truth-about-race/#comment-1482184364
""The love that dare not speak its name" is not only a poignant way to refer to nationalism or racialism, it also enables one to segue straight into a plaint about the encumbrances society heaps on whites who grieve for the elimination of their kind. Framed this way it's very easy to retort to the inevitable intransigent "Very well, there's something about my message that upsets you. But on the assumption you care about your group, how would you go about safeguarding its existence?"
Going beyond the particular line quoted above, there are numerous similar talking points once used to shame whites into (what turned out to be) submitting to dispossession that can be appropriated for the pro-white cause. Indeed, I can foresee a very similar process occurring to that which took society from a default pro-white setting to a default pro-black setting. A society in which white racial interests took unconscious and automatic precedence over black racial interests, and in which whites were valued and blacks disvalued in myriad ways has now been reversed. I consider it perfectly plausible that society could transition to a pro-white default setting once more.
The above analysis does not ignore non-black non-whites. They fitted themselves to the foregoing patterns as best they could. For example, non-whites who could once emphasized their whiteness; today such people emphasize their non-whiteness. Non-whites once valued and attempted to adopt white culture; today they value and ape black culture. That America was a white man's country was once universally accepted by non-whites; today non-whites universally accept that whites owe blacks recompense. All of this could change.
The necessity and desirability of keeping blacks out of white communities could be understood, accepted and practiced by non-whites as well as whites. That white existence is threatened and white identity politics is necessary to ensure survival is a principle that non-whites could adopt to secure their own group interests. That whites have been wronged and that wrongs must be righted can be accepted by non-whites and non-white political groups can cynically (more likely than sincerely) align themselves with the pro-white cause to further their own agendas the way they do today with the pro-black cause - an eminently viable play in a world which will a century from now contain two to three billion blacks and whose continent will not contain them."
http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-love-that-dare-not-speak-its-name.html#comment-1493284992
"If anyone's halfway familiar with my posts he'll know I'm quite "race realistic" about blacks, to put it mildly. Yet, fair-minded fellow that I am, I can't help treating people as individuals, regardless of whatever racial group they belong to. So it was that I built up what I wrongly thought was a decent acquaintance with this black guy at a club I frequent. Well, only a few weeks ago, I was walking from my car to the club when I saw him stumbling about going the other way, obviously very drunk. "Hey, what's goi...," the words were barely out of my mouth when he shoved me hard against the wall and got me into a headlock. I'm never in a mood to take anything from these people so I immediately fought back and bloodied his nose. Perhaps sensing how incredibly enraged I was, he scampered away rather than continue the fight. I didn't just feel assaulted, I felt violated. I later asked myself whether I was so angry because I was attacked, or whether it was because the attacker was black and I "should have known better" than to get close with a black. I decided his being black really was the factor. I've simply never ever experienced an incident like that with a white, and I've known many, many "marginal" whites in my time."
[My note: Yet another reason to drop any pretense of "treating Negroes as individuals" or attempting to search for the mythical "good Negro." A nigger is a nigger is a nigger and all of them should be avoided as much as possible.]
http://www.amren.com/features/2014/07/how-i-learned-the-truth-about-race/#comment-1480910743
No, none of these are my own. If the thoughts and opinions are similar to ones expressed by me on this board, it's because my views are firmly reality-based and not that uncommon once people are freed from the manacles of PC censorship.
From "silviosilver":
"Opie and Anthony know the score. A few years ago they gave a favorable mention to Niggermania which saw a huge influx of new visitors to that site. In my view, the devastation caused by the nigger animal is far and away the most vulnerable chink in the armor of the racial status quo, which is why so many resources are committed to propping it up. "Telling the truth about racial differences" is far from all that is necessary to make a decisive pro-white political impact, but the difference between niggers and, well, everyone else is so enormous that it's madness not to exploit it. This is particularly so because the kind of nigger the average middle class white (or middle class anything, for that matter) is likely to interact with is unquestionably miles above the typical savage that infests the 'hood, so in combination with the absurdly unrealistic media representation of blacks these people have a wildly inaccurate impression of what the presence of large numbers of niggers implies for a community."
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2014/07/05/anthony-cumia-of-opie-anthony-radio-show-fired-sirius-xm-for-violating-the-standard/
"It's very frustrating. I have every reason to believe there are uncountable whites who understand full well the meaning of blacks and their typical talk. I overhear such sentiments voiced all the time. It's very much a myth that whites are totally clueless about racial issues, at least among the working classes. But that sentiment so far has not translated into concerted social action, not even - as you suggest - banding together for self-defense against even the most obvious of anti-white provocations.
Before we judge, however, we should be mindful of the cultural considerations that tend to constrain whites. Firstly, there is not a pervasive sense of white cultural identity. Whites tend to "know they are white," but it's a "negative" identity, the result of not being anything else - a "boring," plain old "white boy" (gah, I hear this "identity" being volunteered more and more in non-racialist conversation). Secondly, even when whites have a positive identity - when they're White and they know it and they like it - it's an identity better "sensed" than it is "understood." That's to say white identity is unsure of itself, what its borders are and what such an identity signifies and implies; and needless to add, such an identity in today's world is always on the defensive, justifying and apologizing for itself rather than being taken for granted.
The result is that whites are profoundly unsure of themselves when it comes to acting as whites. On numerous occasions I have witnessed whites being treated roughly and - frankly, despite myself ("it's not my business") - I have felt a tremendous urge to step in and attempt to even the odds. This urge has been most notable when the incident has involved blacks, the group that invariably triggers my racial instincts most viscerally. I have so much wanted to wade in without regard to "who is in the right," but I have been held back by the knowledge that: (a) society in general would emphatically not take my side if it came down to a legal judgment; and (b) that the individuals involved would in all likelihood disavow my involvement rather than express gratitude for it. It's quite the conundrum."
http://www.amren.com/features/2014/07/how-i-learned-the-truth-about-race/#comment-1482184364
""The love that dare not speak its name" is not only a poignant way to refer to nationalism or racialism, it also enables one to segue straight into a plaint about the encumbrances society heaps on whites who grieve for the elimination of their kind. Framed this way it's very easy to retort to the inevitable intransigent "Very well, there's something about my message that upsets you. But on the assumption you care about your group, how would you go about safeguarding its existence?"
Going beyond the particular line quoted above, there are numerous similar talking points once used to shame whites into (what turned out to be) submitting to dispossession that can be appropriated for the pro-white cause. Indeed, I can foresee a very similar process occurring to that which took society from a default pro-white setting to a default pro-black setting. A society in which white racial interests took unconscious and automatic precedence over black racial interests, and in which whites were valued and blacks disvalued in myriad ways has now been reversed. I consider it perfectly plausible that society could transition to a pro-white default setting once more.
The above analysis does not ignore non-black non-whites. They fitted themselves to the foregoing patterns as best they could. For example, non-whites who could once emphasized their whiteness; today such people emphasize their non-whiteness. Non-whites once valued and attempted to adopt white culture; today they value and ape black culture. That America was a white man's country was once universally accepted by non-whites; today non-whites universally accept that whites owe blacks recompense. All of this could change.
The necessity and desirability of keeping blacks out of white communities could be understood, accepted and practiced by non-whites as well as whites. That white existence is threatened and white identity politics is necessary to ensure survival is a principle that non-whites could adopt to secure their own group interests. That whites have been wronged and that wrongs must be righted can be accepted by non-whites and non-white political groups can cynically (more likely than sincerely) align themselves with the pro-white cause to further their own agendas the way they do today with the pro-black cause - an eminently viable play in a world which will a century from now contain two to three billion blacks and whose continent will not contain them."
http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-love-that-dare-not-speak-its-name.html#comment-1493284992
"If anyone's halfway familiar with my posts he'll know I'm quite "race realistic" about blacks, to put it mildly. Yet, fair-minded fellow that I am, I can't help treating people as individuals, regardless of whatever racial group they belong to. So it was that I built up what I wrongly thought was a decent acquaintance with this black guy at a club I frequent. Well, only a few weeks ago, I was walking from my car to the club when I saw him stumbling about going the other way, obviously very drunk. "Hey, what's goi...," the words were barely out of my mouth when he shoved me hard against the wall and got me into a headlock. I'm never in a mood to take anything from these people so I immediately fought back and bloodied his nose. Perhaps sensing how incredibly enraged I was, he scampered away rather than continue the fight. I didn't just feel assaulted, I felt violated. I later asked myself whether I was so angry because I was attacked, or whether it was because the attacker was black and I "should have known better" than to get close with a black. I decided his being black really was the factor. I've simply never ever experienced an incident like that with a white, and I've known many, many "marginal" whites in my time."
[My note: Yet another reason to drop any pretense of "treating Negroes as individuals" or attempting to search for the mythical "good Negro." A nigger is a nigger is a nigger and all of them should be avoided as much as possible.]
http://www.amren.com/features/2014/07/how-i-learned-the-truth-about-race/#comment-1480910743