Thursday 8 November 2012

Mandingo
(1975)

RATING:80%
FORMAT:DVD



Fine film about the essential degeneracy of White culture, especially as regards their sex and money fixations.

Everyone here has their price; leaving no room for love or friendship or trust. The essential metaphor here is of a stud farm, where the only two purposes of sex are breeding and/or relief for both Blacks and Whites.

Uppity Whites parade as the genetic superiors of Blacks to conceal the deep-seated sexual insecurities caused by the fact that White supremacy means not being able to choose one’s true love: Arranged marriage being the dominant, but denied, form of legalized sexual relations among White Christians.

The White inability to see others, and each other, as individuals is well in evidence in their desperate drive to categorize human beings into pigeonholes that they cannot be shown to pre-fit, particularly as regards inferior and superior. This essential fact of White culture creates a dramatic problem that is implied - but only partly explored - in that the White characters are aspects of groupthink, not individuals in themselves, although we see some Whites struggling to achieve an individuality denied them by their culture’s emotionally repressive social imperatives.

One of the things that’s most disturbing about the film is the depiction of the consequences of slavery, racism and hypocrisy of Wwhites, how it warps son, Perry KING’s natural tenderness towards Brenda SYKES into a horrifying insecure paranoia that evolves into aberrantly exaggerated jealousy and sexually-motivated violence. And poor Susan GEORGE’s character is driven totally mad by her husband’s neglect and jealousy and the seemingly-contradictory tender erotic ministrations of slave, Ken NORTON.

The fragility of a White culture based on a genetic fallacy is implied in the fact Whites clearly recognize the humanity of Blacks - hence their fear of slave rebellions - while trying to deny the meaning of such rebellions (the human desire to be free) in the severity of the response to such drapetomania. This is also suggested by the Southern Gothic look (but not feel) of the interior scenes in their suggestion of wealthy emptiness and loveless satiation.

Here, the crime is its own punishment. Why would Whites create a culture so debased that they can achieve no personal satisfaction from it other than by debasing the bodies of others and, in the process, their own, in a desperate attempt – like the sadistic child pulling off the wings of flies – to achieve psychological fulfillment through physical violence? For Mandingo is a film about bodies: Bodies as commodities, bodies as skin color, bodies as objects and subjects of desire, bodies as instruments and recipients of violence. The characters here are limited to only understanding themselves as bodies: Doomed to be forever wanting, and never getting, more. The jarring tenderness of the scenes of miscegenation are complex and intense without being exploitive. The characters are attempting to escape their stifling social order (while tempting the viewer to do likewise) as the bodies of the four leads - Perry King, Brenda Sykes, Susan George and (especially) Ken Norton are eroticised by the camera and served up before the viewer as icons of unfettered sexuality and joyful celebration; ironically presided over by the decaying body of James Mason’s aging patriarch. They fail because their relationship are literally and metaphorically only skin-deep, so steeped in moral corruption are they – like the man who thinks sitting in a room full of spiders will cure him of arachnophobia.

The damned-if-you-do; damned-if-you-don’t mentality imposed on everyone by Whites is well-presented, yet the all-important justification for the Black Holocaust is entirely absent; making it difficult not to see the modern-day parallels to the White behavior displayed here since the attitudes shown are devoid of historical context and thus still relevant.

The real achievement of this film is the matter-of-factness of the cruelty and its casual and normalized nature in the minds of Whites who had also come to see each other as cattle in their breeding/marriage customs. As a description of a descent into a White hell, only a movie like Salo beats it. Unlike, the US tv-series Roots or Holocaust, there is no attempt to deny the basic hypocrisy (eg, White women are sluts if they enjoy sex) and schizophrenia (eg, Blacks are labeled inferior yet feared) of Whites nor to suggest that White supremacy is somehow unusual or deviant from White norms. Lacking melodramatic tricks, the accurate and historical facts of the matter are clearly laid out in fictional form to emphasize the fact that while White behavior changes, their attitudes do not.

A brilliant antidote to the attempt to hide the truth that is Gone with the Wind (although inferior to The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith) and an excellent example of one of the many skeletons that Whites would prefer were left in the closet of their history. Like The Godfather, there is no way that this movie could be anything other than nasty and brutish in its content. Moreover, the White world is locked into a spiral that can only end in self-annihilation, yet is actually cathartic in portraying something against which everything else seems an improvement.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Tuesday 2 October 2012

Amazing Grace
(2007)

RATING:40%
FORMAT:DVD



Usual White supremacist nonsense about how abolishing racial slavery was an act of godliness, yet which never explains why the institution - and the racism supporting it - was established in the first place.

An incomplete history that leaves White culture unexamined, as if racial slavery were somehow a foreign imposition or disease that simply had to be cured, rather than an endemic part of the culture that helped fund the Industrial Revolution and the British Empire.

Inevitably, those who benefit from White supremacy today (Whites) are hardly likely to fully investigate the basis of their culture nor the present-day benefits that accrue to them from such supremacy (Institutional Racism).

The lowest estimates for the number of slaves forcibly migrated to the Americas are used in a vain attempt to minimize the scale of the Black Holocaust. As if this somehow minimizes guilt - guilt being seen as somehow a quantity rather than a quality. This is similar to Holocaust deniers disputing that six millions Jews were murdered.

The claim is made that racial slavery was accepted by most people as if even the slaves thought the same. But then White films like this never consider the victims as truly human - only the victimizers - the latter of whom are seen as misguided rather than volitionally evil. Compare this with the treatment of the Jewish holocaust, where the victimizers are always seen as willfully bad.

Whites here see Blacks as essentially passive; hence, the fact that slave rebellions are barely mentioned nor actively supported. Whites see Whites who speak out against slavery as brave, but not the Blacks who risk their lives to fight it. The present-day legacy of slavery (White supremacy) is still with us and is likely to remain so since old habits die hard - as movies like this attest.

There is no consideration of the short-lived economic benefits of racial slavery and that its abolition was a long-term economic advantage to Whites, since it rendered Whites more employable. Beforehand Whites experienced more unemployment because slaves do not need to be paid and are thus, in the long run, cheaper. There is also no mention of the economic fact that Prime Minister Pitt wanted slavery abolished because it was becoming less economically beneficial to the British Empire and because it would hurt the French Empire, whose slave colonies were far more productive. With Whites, the only constancy is hypocrisy.

There is no talk of why supposedly-loving Christians approved of such an unloving trade.

There is little recognition of the fact that Whites treat the White poor as little better than slaves. Wilberforce himself was a member of a secret committee investigating and repressing lower-class discontent in 1817; while opposing feminine anti-slavery associations; making this movie something of a hagiography, to say the least.

Whites discussing human rights is always nothing more than a parlor game in which human suffering is viewed only in the abstract - as here. The schadenfreude is self-evident and suggests racial slavery and abolitionism are two sides of the same coin. The brutality of slavery is simply a recognition of its economic fragility as a practice since it requires the use of expensive force to maintain it.

There is no consideration of the fact that any majoritarian democratic system will always legalize evil so long as a majority supports it; resulting in the moral compromise of gradual abolition in order to avoid slave as well as slave-master revolt - even though revolution is the only way to avoid such ethical compromise.

There is no consideration of the fact that the racism justifying slavery was not being abolished since it was also used to justify the British Empire. After so-called Emancipation in 1833, slaves could not own land nor vote, so the word Emancipation is clearly a misnomer.

Unsurprisingly, the film makes no comparison between the White Abolitionist horror of racial slavery with their fear of Blacks as people. The former is celebrated while the latter is resolutely ignored.

A perfect example of the narcissism pervading all White anti-racism; perfectly mirroring the self-regard of the White supremacist. Impossible to imagine any White more committed to the abolition of racial slavery than a Black yet, again, Blacks feature here mostly as passive victims - as if Whites believe the sufferings of Whites to abolish slavery were in any way comparable to the sufferings of slaves. As if Helen Suzman were the architect of the fall of Apartheid and not Nelson Mandela. As if the execution of Colonel Von Stauffenberg was somehow more important than the deaths of six millions Jews.

Somehow Whites believe only they can change the world for the better - saviors made in their own image - in a world they have made bad by their own actions; eg, Apartheid, Jim Crow, the Third Reich, the British Empire, etc. The mental conflict inside Whites as to the inconsistency between thought, word and deed on show here reveals a love of unearned privilege at permanent war with feelings of guilt and shame. As eerie a critique of White supremacy as one could possibly imagine; that ends up supporting it by supporting the abolition of racial slavery but not the racist British Empire: Abolishing the effect but not the cause.

As weak a critique of racial slavery as the film Amistad despite the exceptional quality of the acting talent and the high technical quality of the production

A film about John Newton (the composer of the eponymous song) would have made for a far more satisfying work, but that would have confronted a White audience with a crisis of conscience, regarding Negrophobia being the basis of their culture, that they still grapple with today. But this film evades all of this by pretending racial slavery has nothing to do with racism; thereby avoiding White blushes. Whites today still clearly have their moral priorities reversed and their ethical compass pointing in the wrong direction. A movie as White supremacist as the historical figures it denounces.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Saturday 18 August 2012

White Men Playing with Themselves
(2012)


There is no gene for ethics or morality, so this is just more of the scientific racism one has come to expect from Whites.

There is no proof that genes determine character so this is really a eugenics program to kill-off those one does not approve of. This scientist claims the existence of practical ethics as if there could be such a thing as impractical ethics. Only when ethics is universal can such an idea work, since one could easily - as the Nazis did - conclude that Homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses and Freemasons are unethical and destroy them for not being Aryan enough.

It is important for science to stop dabbling in politics unless it has objective proof of its assertions - which it clearly lacks here.

The ethics one claims to be able to produce children to be better able to fit, need to be not practical - whatever that means - but objective. Human beings have never agreed on this and science has never provided an objective basis for such a determination. Moreover, a moral obligation can never exist because morality is about choice, not duty. To claim that such a thing does exist is to tacitly admit one does not understand ethics and that one does not behave in accordance with any of its tenets – precisely because one does not understand the moral life.

Claims like Better or More Intelligent have no objective meaning unless they are scientifically defined. Politically, they mean Conformist and Being Less Prone to Disagree. Claiming responsible parenting is based on Nazi eugenics is a paradox since it means parenting would become no longer necessary to produce good people, since parenting is then transferred to the test tube.

If it is bad to cause harm, then genetically-engineered people will not defend themselves when they are attacked by non genetically-engineered people. The latter will, therefore, be dead and dead people can be neither better nor worse.

There is little evidence for the existence of a natural lottery since Natural Selection is considered synonymous with the concept of Survival-of-the-Fittest - nature screens out useless mutations already. Rational design is not a natural extension of screening for physical diseases since the latter is proven science while the former is not.

All of this gibberish comes down to the tacit admission that Whites have failed to produce ethical cultures because of their preference for such things as White supremacy, Social Snobbery, Sexism, Erotophobia, Pornography, Divorce, Adultery, Alcoholism, Drug-Addiction, etc. Because White culture is essentially a failed culture, Whites now want to try to make people good by accepting bizarre genetic theories and then pretend that these can be used to create better people in the laboratory. Could Whites have been more abjectly-explicit than this at their failure to be as good (or better) than other cultures - who do not face these problems to the same great extent Whites do? Whites have clearly given-up on themselves as viable human beings and are now determined to destroy themselves with pseudo-science because of centuries of guilt for not being as superior as they think they are.

Her is a scientist without scientific merit who bases his work on possibilities, suggestions and likelihoods, tied to his own ball and chain of squeamishness (yet who claims genetically-engineered people are less likely to cause harm - how is that for squeamishness?) and irrationality. Like one of the human-hating charlatans who claims intelligence can be measured, this is a desperate and despairing attempt to make genetics a hard science - as opposed to a soft one - because it cannot make the same hard-&-fast predictions about existence that, for example, chemistry and physics can.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

White Affirmative Action


President Obama will always suffer from the fact that Whites are Institutionally-Racist. They still have such trouble coping – emotionally – with a non-White president, that they cannot allow him to point-out how mired in White supremacy Whites remain. White politicians can play the Race Card and remain popular, Black ones risk their careers.

Whites will always believe Affirmative Action is only for them, they will never be happy granting it to non-Whites since that would automatically mean Whites having to work harder for the unearned benefits granted them at birth by virtue of White supremacy.

White laziness is a strong motivating factor in White lives and is, paradoxically, the main reason Blacks can do so well in a White supremacist country. So long as Blacks realize their hard work will always be of greater quality and quantity than that of any White who still clings to a culture based on a fallacious racial hierarchy. In other words, Blacks know they have to work hard to succeed – they are under none of the illusions Whites are under about the relationship between hard work and success. Only Whites believe they do not have to work hard and that their skin pigmentation will see them through the travails of life.

An unsatisfied sense of perpetual entitlement to what one has not worked for is the basis of the White chip-on-the-shoulder that a White whiner like Abigail Fisher so clearly possesses. When Whites gain admission to university because they are White, none ever complain. But when Blacks do so, Whites complain - like the sons-of-bitches that they are - about how unfair race-based selection is. Whites are now coming to the painful realization that having made race a political and a cultural issue, their invented Race Card is now coming back to bite them on the arse.

Polls in the US (United States) have never shown that most Americans oppose Affirmative Action, they only show that Whites oppose it for non-Whites because Whites conflate it with reverse racism – something that does not actually exist anywhere on the Earth. Whites choose to believe – out of their fear and hatred of non-Whites & because they lack the imagination & wider life-experience to assume anything else – that Affirmative Action is based on quotas (ie, the “Affirmative Discrimination” practiced by Whites for hundreds of years), even though such quotas are illegal in the US. Or, that less well-qualified people obtain a goal over the better-qualified. Whites do this to distract themselves from the painful reality that US culture is based on two separate genocides – Native-Americans & Africans – when Reichs-Chancellor Hitler was content with only one: The Final Solution.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Thursday 16 August 2012

White Reality


An Angry White Female (AWF) responded to Frank TALKER’s comment regarding this article:

‘The Jefferson Lies,’ David Barton's Controversial Best Seller, Dropped By Publishing House For Factual Errors

Frank TALKER said:

Whites are trying to re-write their history because of the shame and guilt it causes them - they are the ethnic group least proud of its heritage. [HuffPost Comments]

The AWF said:

...[O]ne man twisting history is no reflection on all whites. You would have to count exactly how many whites have deliberately falsified history and prove that every single white person has done so to be telling the truth. It is just reverse racism. [HuffPost Comments]


Apart from the fact that Frank TALKER never claimed one White person's behavior reflected badly on all Whites - the claim is nothing more than White paranoia - Whites posit a false standard of proof which they claim is required to be 100%. They only do this with regard to issues that make them look bad - never regarding issues that make them look good. (Notice also her claim that reverse racism exists, despite the complete lack of evidence for this: A claim designed to implicitly deny the existence of Institutional Racism.)

When Whites are accused of being White supremacist, they angrily demand 100% proof. When Whites accuse Blacks of being inferior, Whites never offer proof to the same impossible level. In other words, if Blacks cannot prove all Whites racist, then White culture cannot be Institutionally-Racist. This is as nutty as claiming that Nazi Germany was not Nazi because you cannot prove that all Germans were Nazi; meaning Nazi Germany wasn’t really Nazi at all. Could you get any more White supremacist than that?

There are no historical examples of 100% proof being presented to demonstrate anything. To claim its need is symptomatic of the negative affect of White supremacy on the White intellect: It makes Whites claim the existence of the impossible to compensate for the complete lack of proof for White, genetic superiority.

In criminal law, even Whites only demand proof that is beyond a reasonable doubt - not 100%. In civil law, the White standard is the balance of probabilities - not 100% proof.

In science, scientists come to conclusions based upon available, empirical evidence. They are always forced to acknowledge they do not know all the knowable facts and that, because of this, their conclusions are subject to constant change. By definition, it is impossible to know the full extent of what one does not know - nor what remains to be known - so this will always be the case.

Whites thus demand 100% proof of the existence of White supremacy; knowing full well that no such proof can ever exist. This makes Whites believe that the existence of Institutional Racism can always be denied, while the guilty White conscience can be appeased and placated. At least until the next Black man is killed while being arrested and/or in police custody.

Another benefit of playing the White Race Card is that Whites can then claim that all cultures are racist and that Whites are no better nor worse than anyone else. And that there is such a thing as reverse racism, despite the fact that Whites could never suffer to the same degree as Blacks, given their numerical superiority. All without evidence or (100%) proof, naturally.

Whites have no other history than White supremacy so, to retain the advantages of same, they teach racist lies as fact in a desperate attempt to avoid rebuttal and the open revelation of their lazy dependency on White supremacy to survive.

The corollary of this is that Whites make the study of their own history deliberately dull in order to vainly hide its supremacist essence and the still current relevance of racism to their success in life.

The only reason to fear any truth is because it reveals that one is benefiting from illegal and/or immoral activity. This fear refutes the White fallacy of being self-made men when they can all benefit from the White supremacy they gainsay. Trying to hide ongoing affirmative action for Whites (endemic White racism) is the only way Whites try to evade White guilt and shame for such action. Thus, perversely, Whites worship the very ideology that makes a full human life for them impossible. They have to become schizophrenic to simultaneously deny the existence of White supremacy while desperately trying to maintain its benefits.

The only other reason to hide anything is for the purposes of self-protection and self-defense. But, that does not apply regarding White racism since White supremacists are not under any threat from non-Whites - that Whites can successfully and logically articulate. Thus, the White guilt complex is the only reason Whites falsify their history on a regular basis. And why they claim Blacks must abide by a false definition of proof that White statements are never tested against.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Friday 10 August 2012

“Mixed Race” for Beginners
(2012)



Blacks who think they are "Biracial" or "Mixed Race" are still "Niggers" to Whites. Such Blacks confuse genetics with politics in the same deliberate way Whites do to justify crimes against humanity like Apartheid. Only Blacks do it to appease White supremacists.

In genetics, one is what ones genetic make-up makes one; in politics, you can all-too-easily become what others try to make you - if you are not careful enough to be self-respecting. Neither arse-licking nor appeasement ever works with Whites - just look at what happened to the Jews when Whites tried it with Hitler.

"Mixed Race" is a Nazi category that neither exists in genetics nor reality. If a Black breeds with a White, the resulting child is as human as its parents and not a member of a separate race or species. Believing anything else is a racist hangover from the days when Whites perverted their own science for political gain.

So this is just another Black pretending they are not really black in the desperate hope that White supremacists will leave them alone.

Mixed breeding in dogs is fine, but dogs do not racially-abuse each other, so it will not work in humans because the latter do.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Sunday 5 August 2012

White Culture



Don’t Buy into It...

Whites are scared that their culture is finally going down the toilet of history, so now they seek to gain attention by being as provocative as they can about how superior they are despite the decline. They see no other way to deal with their failings other than to pretend that they do not really exist while, simultaneously, concluding that they are caused by others.

Creating victims via inappropriate aggression - where none would normally exist - is essential to Whites. Otherwise, they would have no-one to contrast themselves with nor to feel superior towards.

Whites love this sort of rubbish and it is, therefore, essential reading for Blacks since it shows them what Whites are really like - under the skin; saving them the necessity of getting to know any Whites to ensure ones distaste of them is factually based so that Whites cannot counter any accusations of White supremacy laid against Whites by saying that the (Black) accusers do not know any White people.

That so many White women (teachers) read the newspaper is proof of how retarded they are and explains why the UK education system is in the mess it is in.

This is the kind of bile that Whites will produce given that their culture is based on self-hatred and the resulting self-delusion. This is why Whites rarely read non-White newspapers, in case they see themselves as others see them, which would be even more frightening than the content of The Daily Mail.

The other unstated problem here is that print journalism is dying; hence, the desperation to maintain - and possibly even increase - circulation by printing White self-indulgence in the only form of expression open to the volitionally emotionally-repressed and the only non-spontaneous ethnic group: The claim that the world owes it a living by accepting second-class citizenship as a birthright so that Whites can be superior by default and with as little effort as possible. This is Whites letting off steam because of the workaday mundanity of their insular lives.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Thursday 2 August 2012

How Whites Think


Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance...

The reporting is White supremacist precisely because that is how White culture is.

Whites will always claim bad White behavior is individual while bad Black behavior is collective: Whites do not see Blacks as individuals. And Whites commit most of the pedophilia so want to distract attention from their own collusion in the rape of their own children.

The guilt problem is that Whites produce many children who put themselves in danger through bad parenting, yet Whites prefer to claim that the racism of others is at fault and not poor quality upbringings. Ethnic-minority pedophile groups can prey on White girls because they are the easiest, not the Whitest.

Whites never learn from their own history because they have developed selective memories. Whites still wish to scapegoat entire communities for the White failure to develop a culture that is worthwhile rather than simply rapacious. This is why Whites confuse legality with their culture, in the vain hope of legalizing White supremacy.

Despite the lack of evidence of a component of racial aggravation in these cases, Whites still choose to believe that when Blacks commit crimes against Whites it is always racially-motivated. They believe everyone else is as racist as they are on an It-takes-one-to-know-one basis.

Such reporting does not create White supremacy, it is merely a reflection of it. White culture would have no substance whatsoever without its irrational fear of others. That is, in fact, the definition of White culture: Xenophobia.

Whites do not deny that their culture is White supremacist - realistically, they can’t - they will simply defend it with any irrational nonsense to preserve the very sense of superiority causing the problem in the first place.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Tuesday 31 July 2012

Save Whites from Themselves


Yet another confused and scared White trying to conceal her fear of Blacks by pretending to be anti-racist by indulging in the White narcissism of claiming White is Beautiful - and always will be, to Whites.

Whites will never learn, will they? Instead, of telling Blacks how much Whites now like them, it would be more honest to tell Blacks why Whites worship their own skin pigmentation.


Whites will always invoke White privilege in their quest to control the agenda on discussions of White supremacy - despite the fact this represents a clear conflict-of-interest in their benefitting from same. Their desire to hide this fact leads them to call any non-White a racist when they are being told they have nothing to offer the debate until they renounce such privilege because they are the ones being White supremacist.

Color-blindness is just more White supremacy in that Whites never do this with each other - only with those whose skin color they simultaneously notice then pretend not to. It is a political game of pretending that if you deracinate someone, they become human. But since this process of deracination is not felt necessary for Whites (deemed already to be fully human by virtue of their skin pigmentation), it is precisely skin color which is the sole criterion of human judgment employed while it is simultaneously denied. This keeps White supremacist evil very much in place but with a smile; shovelling Jews into the gas chambers with a friendly grin. For Whites this is Enlightened Racism

This book is a lame-brained attempt to imply that Whites can determine race-relations while not being labelled White supremacist - an impossible goal that Whites should really have given up years ago. But their desperation keeps them on the same road to nowhere.

Because one cannot read every book, just the suspicion of White supremacy would lead to Blacks not needing to waste their time by reading this book. It is for Whites to prove that it is of redeeming social value which, so far, no-one has. The fundamental reason for this is because Whites do not wish to face-up-to the psychiatric distortions in their own psyches wrought by 500 years of White supremacy. They do this by the simple expedient of claiming only Blacks suffer as a consequence of White supremacy; ie, that since racism is not really a bad thing for Whites, Whites cannot possibly feel guilty or schizophrenic or paranoid about it. Yet the inability of Whites to engage in this debate with reason and common sense just shows how much they wish to shut it down with their own anger, resentment and shame.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Saturday 14 July 2012

Race-Card Politics



Whites have no monopoly on playing the Race Card - because a White invented tv, does not mean Blacks cannot buy one. It is an obvious and a common fallacy to suggest that just because someone tries to do something, that they will be automatically successful. Only Whites posses a monopoly on successfully playing the Race Card.

When Whites accuse Blacks of playing the Race Card (but only after Blacks criticize Whites for being racist) Whites never make the accusation in response to any other accusation nor do they make it of Whites. This attempts to deflect criticism away from Whites on to Blacks; thereby avoiding the issue raised and implying that White supremacy is merely a figment of the Black imagination. It is a racist means of undervaluing anything a Black says since it supposedly allows Whites to ignore anything a Black says. Whenever the Race Card is alleged by Whites, it is simultaneously being played by them.

The sole reason Whites invented the Race Card is moral evasion. There is no evidence Blacks ever successfully use this Card and, since Whites are the only ones who can benefit from playing it, they are the only ones ever likely to do so. This is a classic conflict-of-interest (like Whites defining Racism) since it allows Whites to criticize Blacks with the very Race Card they condemn Blacks for using; benefiting psychologically and economically in the process.

The Race Card is racist in concept and practice, also employed by Whites to give the impression Blacks are as racist as Whites. Yet no Black country is institutionally-racist and the White supremacists who use the Race Card cannot name any Blacks who use it as successfully as they, themselves, do.

Whites created an Institutionally-Racist culture for themselves which, by definition, will not help Blacks to play the Race Card. Such a culture is designed to help only the creator group - at the expense of all the others. There is no example of a Black playing the Race Card successfully precisely because all 52 White cultures are inherently White supremacist. In a Black culture, there would be no need to play such a Card and, so, no possible evidence of its being played. The claim that Blacks play the Race Card is also, therefore a vain means for Whites to avoid the fact that this Card can only work for Whites.

Whites play the Race Card by claiming Blacks do so - without evidence. Whites never play this Card when they think the critic is White - instead they cry "Race Traitor".

There is no grammatical, semantic nor social guideline preventing anyone from reading between the lines of anything said or written. Any claim that one is responding to something not said is an attempt to abolish the concepts of innuendo, implication and suggestion. It attempts to reduce all criticism to concretes only; avoiding necessary abstractions; thereby, curtailing rational thought. It would mean taking everything at face value - not only a self-evident fallacy, but a threat to ones very life.

In White culture, people are judged by the ethnicity and social class of their parents and the gender to which they were born. Whites distinguish between Whites and non-Whites, so that they make decisions about non-Whites on the basis of their non-White parent, not their White one. White culture has decided that people like Jessica Ennis and President Barack Obama are Black - Black culture has not. When such Blacks become successful, however, they suddenly "move up in class" - in the White imagination - and become "Mixed Race" - a category they were not placed in before they became well-known. In other words, they are Black before they achieve distinction – "Mixed Race" afterwards. That is the nearest Whites nowadays come to declaring a Black an "Honorary White", as in the days of South-African Apartheid.

Because Whites conflate the political concept of "Race" with the scientific practice of genetics, Whites are always confused as to how to treat Blacks who have Whites in their family - witness the deliberate White confusion over President Obama's alleged ethnicity (& nationality). This volitional muddying of the racial waters also facilitates the old White divide-and-conquer tactic of trying to get different parts of the Black community to fight each other for more crumbs from the White High Table; hopefully preventing the United Front (or even a Two-Front War) that is always hard to defeat in any war - let alone a Racewar.

White supremacist organizations like the BNP are the most honest Whites since they make no such taxonomic distinctions between Blacks. The BNP offers no racial-abuse exemption certificates for the not-really-Blacks ("Mixed Race") that would enable the latter to walk the streets at night without fear of reprisal for committing the crime of not being born Black. The BNP's White behavior reveals White fear of all non-Whites, as such, not merely the really-Blacks as compared with the not-so-black Blacks.

"Mixed Race" is a non-genetic political category invented by Whites to deal with a psychology problem caused by their own White supremacy. The category is designed to label the feared product of feared sexual unions; revealing how frightened White men are that White women are willingly engaging in sexual union with Black men - despite years of conditioning not to - a blow to the White man's sexual ego from which he chooses not to recover. This category also refers to the fact that if the trend for sex with people you like - rather than with those you are told to like - continues, Whites will be a UK minority within a century and, thus, less politically powerful.

The fear of Black revenge for 500 years of White supremacy would then, as it is for White South Africans today, be uppermost in the minds of Whites. They will do all they can to the so-called mixed race to ensure that they either grow up to think, talk and act like Whites (by being less harshly treated for being Black) or are treated as badly as Whites usually treat Blacks in whom Whites can discern no White genetic material.

A "Mixed Race" category allows Whites to play the game of lessening - in their own minds - the number of Blacks in "their White country" by simply re-labeling Blacks they are less afraid of as "not-really-Black". Without such categories, Whites would have to accept that their genome is fast dying out.

White claims to be able to read other people's minds are simply the arrogance attendant upon White bonding - the belief that all who agree with Whites are White and that anyone else is automatically not White. They spring from a lack of evidence for any negative statement made about Blacks; meaning Whites have no argument to make, so they revert-to-type by employing ad hominem statements rather than ad rem ones. Bigots always do this.

Blacks segregate themselves from Whites for the same reason Jews refused to integrate with the NSDAP - all White cultures are White supremacist. Organizations that use "Black" in their name are designed to address the specific problems Blacks face in countries that favor Caucasoids. Such nomenclature is also designed to be candid in terms of whom these organizations are meant to help - Whites can join, but why would they, since they fear the members? This effectively keeps Whites out of such organizations, where they can do much less harm - especially to the minds of impressionable Black children.

Blacks also segregate from Whites because Blacks focus on the family in ways that Whites do not. Blacks are more helpful to each other and less inclined to whinge to the government when their mummies do not love them or their parents were divorced or they were raised in an orphanage. Blacks do not treat the government as a substitute for a caring, sharing family life.

Like the Titanic, White culture is a ship you do not board. Whites built it, launched it, sailed in it and claimed it was unsinkable - yet it sank. Fortunately, no Black lives were lost. Given that White culture is dying, after the collapse of the various European Empires, the economic failings of Whites make it imperative to achieve as much economic independence from them as possible - as this was necessary for White women to achieve independence from men who saw them as nothing more than domestic servants.

There is no need to create a White Police Federation, for example, since it already exists: To put "White" in front of the title would be mere tautology. And there has been no widespread condemnation following its establishment and growth (at least not among Whites). Even the Institutionally-Racist BNP is not honest enough to put the word "White" in its title - although it is obviously there, implicitly.

Whites lack the self-respect, personal honesty and moral & political courage to call a spade a spade.

Whites despise women for creating women's groups and hate homosexuals for espousing Gay Pride, since their reaction to these groups proves how sexist Whites are. And no-one in history has ever established an organization to fight a social evil that did not exist. None of these groups would be necessary if White culture really embraced equality, when every statistical measure - even those produced by Whites - proves the innate White worship of inequality.

Whining because Blacks (& others) wish to help themselves with their own associations means Whites believe Blacks possess no right of self-defense or self-determination. A White male would be branded a sexist if he said, for example, that women were being sexist for forming their own women's-only groups to take positive action against White male chauvinism - the very chauvinism prompting said White male to make such a stupid assertion in the first place.

Whites initiated the Racewar - and must now live with its negative consequences - especially for them (divorce, alcoholism, drug- and sex-addiction, pornography, teenage pregnancy, STDs, stress, suicide, culturelessness, etc). To try and blame Blacks for Whites' own renunciation of their own humanity is just more failed White supremacy.

There is no illegal incitement in stating the truth - to believe otherwise is an attempt by Whites to deprive those they fear of their right to free speech - a right Whites only wish to grant those who are also White and those with whom they also agree. In any case, it is impossible to incite a Racewar that is already begun - by Whites.

White whining is really about the fact Whites know they are not trusted nor liked - and that they know why this is so; exacerbating to their shame and guilt - along with the inevitable White paranoia that goes with starting such unwinnable wars as the War on Terror (aka, the War on Muslims).

Blacks not befriending Whites should never be a problem for Whites since there must be plenty of other Whites for Whites to choose their friends from. But the paradox here is that to be a successful White supremacist requires renouncing ones humanity; eschewing the very friendship being demanded. This makes such a demand a cry for that great non-existent, Unconditional Love, that Whites cannot get from other Whites, so they look outside their own ethnic group for the love they lack at home. This is no way to find a friend, so is really the desire to introduce emotional slavery for Blacks to compensate for the physical slavery Whites were forced to abolish.

One cannot legislate for love, since the desire to fashion Blacks in the image of Whites is not only White supremacist but proves delusions of godlike grandeur on the part of Whites, even though the world does not owe Whites a living.

Whites complain about Blacks because Whites wish to deny the existence of the very Institutional Racism that benefits them, in the vain hope that the attendant guilt can be washed away by blaming Blacks (not Whites, themselves) for these painful thoughts and feelings.

But the days of scapegoating Blacks for the ethical and political failings of Whites are closed. Adulthood means accepting personal responsibility for ones own mistakes and those of ones culture; otherwise neither Whites (nor their culture) can move on. Black fear of Whites can easily be blamed on Whites for their proven White supremacism, but White fear of Blacks cannot be blamed on Blacks (since Blacks are not a threat to Whites) - anymore than pedophilia can be blamed on children.

(My original comment simply pointed out the obvious: 1. White praise for Blacks is rare-to-non-existent; 2. the Racewar has been waged by Whites since 1500; &, 3. Whites will only praise Blacks when Whites can claim some credit or benefit from the praise. Your comments are simply your refusal to face reality - like a man.)


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Friday 25 May 2012

Driving Black boys from the classroom?
(2012)


Blacks have to be careful to separate Black masculinity from Black ideas about the abhorrence of homosexual acts. Otherwise, Blacks run the risk of playing into Whites' view of Blacks as ineducable.

Black masculinity is popular with women - especially White ones - so there is no real problem there.

The real problem is that Blacks think so negatively about homosexuality it is hard for Black Gays to come out and find themselves in the world - the classic Black hypocrisy of denigrating one group while also condemning White supremacists for denigrating Blacks. This has always been a human rights issue that Blacks need to embrace or be condemned as self-serving in their claims for equal treatment.

If Blacks gave up hating Gays, that would lessen Black boys labelling anything they despise with negative references to homosexuality.

In addition, it is necessary to demonstrate to Blacks that while schooling is of little value to Blacks in any Institutionally-Racist White culture, education is always of great value. It is not necessary in the UK to send ones children to school, so they can easily be educated at home - perfectly legally. This will help Blacks avoid the White preference for education factories that produce educated White morons, Blacks not being welcomed at Parent-Teacher meetings, White teachers with low expectations of Blacks (ie, White supremacists who physically fear Blacks), etc.

The UK education system is a Whites-only enclave. It is always better for Blacks to educate themselves about the world so they can best deal with the problems of life without Whites trying to brainwash Blacks with a lot of pseudo-anti-racist propaganda about how wonderful White people are. It is the worst kind of wishful-thinking to assume Whites will help Blacks improve rather than their simply gloating about Black failure they have helped create - their actual preference regarding Blacks – as White gloat about the failure of so-called chavs.

Another necessary distinction to consider is that speaking proper English is a good idea, even though it is a language used by White supremacists for the past 500 years. English and White supremacy are not synonymous – despite strenuous, historical White efforts to make them so - and so speaking good English is not the same as acting White. The issue is communicating clearly, not sucking-up to Whites. Speaking English correctly allows one to speak to a larger number of people and so increase ones life experience so that ones life chances improve.


Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is also the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on the Inevitability of Toe Jam in Hot Weather (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1997) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.

Thursday 24 May 2012

One in five students are victims of race hate


No real shock here since Whites think economics is a zero-sum game.

If a Black student is on campus, Whites think this means a White student has lost a university place. They do not think that the White non-student was simply not good enough.

This is the same as Whites thinking migrants are taking jobs when it is really the case that Whites do not wish to work. In any case, jobs have no nationality as undergraduate places have no skin color.

Whites have created a polity that believes Blacks intellectually inferior, so regard higher education as their own private fiefdom - for their children only. When Blacks are as academically-capable as White kids, Whites are confronted with the terrible knowledge that White supremacism is a fallacy and that their lives are based on nothing but a culture preaching hot air - without real substance: A moral void.

This inevitably makes them angry, frustrated, bitter and, ultimately, depressed, but it never makes them turn away from White supremacy, since that would mean having to admit that the past 500 years of their history is essentially worthless and that their parents bequeathed them an empty culture. Such a culture is not worth fighting for so that it becomes obvious Whites are irrational when they do fight for it.

The blow to the White ego from all of the foregoing is too much to bear since it means that they actually have to work hard to get respect, not merely expect it on the basis of their skin color. For Whites, such competition is painful because, like a man losing an arm-wrestling competition to a woman, it is hard for a White to admit he is somehow less than a Black - yet Institutional Racism proves the White inferiority-complex that they so desperately try to deny.

The most well-educated have the most to lose from altering the basis of White culture from racial hatred to multiculturalism, since they are then no longer guaranteed the best-paid jobs. Thus, the best-educated Whites also tend to be the laziest. White students are the ones who keep their digs the most untidy, drink the most (even attempting copulation with other Whites while under the influence of alcohol) and are the most likely to submit their assignments late. Only people benefiting from Institutional Racism have the time to waste to do this.

The colleges do not care about their Institutional Racism because White lecturers do not like teaching Blacks, since they believe educating those they deem genetically inferior means they will be educating the competition to their own children doing well in a racially-fixed system wherein Blacks are required to take second-place, no matter their superior abilities.



Copyright © 2012 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://protectingthehated.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is also the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on the Inevitability of Toe Jam in Hot Weather (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1997) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.

Monday 23 April 2012

Gone With the Wind
(1939)

RATING:100%
FORMAT:DVD


Better an English girl than a Yankee!

Fascinating Black History Month type movie that perfectly encapsulates - like no other - the ambivalent feelings Whites have about the White supremacism that built their present-day culture. Here there is a constant attempt to whitewash slavery by not presenting it as it really was and, simultaneously, by claiming there was something noble about living high on the hog of Black misery - on land stolen from Indians. This, bizarrely, is presented as a romantic ideal; without political commentary or irony. Hardly surprising then that despite the mass of special features presented here not a single Black person could be found to praise the film - not even from among those featured in it.

The inherent White supremacism of the movie is exacerbated by political correctness that uses words like "pretty" and "civilized" to speak of a culture based on genocide is a cognitively-impaired use of such terms. And yet no White here is shown-up as mentally-ill. Eschewing Margaret Mitchell's overt White supremacism, the movie of her one and only novel tries to evade the issue - and that of secessionism - to avoid offending anyone. There are no "Niggers" or Ku Klux Klan in this movie and so it focuses on a complex love story rather than ethics.

The reason this film works as brilliantly as it does - but only as drama (not history) - is because of superb performances, vivid cinematography, excellent writing, superlative direction - all of which achieve a combination that is well-nigh perfect. White supremacism never seemed so reasonable - as if morality were relative rather than absolute; as if the material benefits of anti-Semitism were being celebrated (SS officers as chivalrous knights) while healthy Jews are worked to death to pay for it all. This expresses the problem for Whites today, how to account for the wealth of the West without reference to slavery and imperialism. Turning it into a love story is no real answer - except for guilt-ridden Whites.

It is hard to feel empathy for a people who, despite so-called "gumption" and lack thereof, are always going to be more successful because of the moral value attached to their skin color by Whites. "Gumption" thus becomes a synonym for an Old Boy Network and/or collective narcissism that obviates the need for a superhuman effort to survive a culture that has gone with the wind. Yet despite Scarlett O’Hara's manipulativeness, immaturity, narcissism and egomania (symptomatic of many Whites) she still holds your attention throughout: A testament to the same qualities in her impersonator, Vivien LEIGH.

Business-wise, this is a rare example of a brilliant film effectively directed by its producer: Forget about Citizen Kane, this is probably the best, most popular film ever made.


Copyright © 2011 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker.blogspot.com) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is also the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on the Inevitability of Toe Jam in Hot Weather (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1997) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.