Are we heading for a Race war?

[Mega]

Just thinking, because there will be no winners.

Mike

[jk]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

https://twitter.com/i/status/1270873856295817224

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

Twitter does not like my browser

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

Harry Potter gets Banned!
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainme...CuM?ocid=ientp

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

Can't we go back to the 70's?

WE made fun people silly enough not to have moved on...

[shiny!]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

I think we're already in a civil war. People ripping down statues and monuments, as if that will make the past not-so. The mentality is no different from the Taliban destroying whatever they disagree with. The problem with obliterating every symbol of the past that one finds offensive is that once people no longer remember the past, they can't understand the influences that make us what we are today. After blowing up everything offensive, when they find they are still angry and miserable inside, they will look for more things to destroy, more people to control. Resentment is a permanent hook looking for something to hang on it.

Again, I am struck by the focus on racism as being the only -ism deserving of media attention. Sexism and sexual violence effect far more people than racism and racial violence. 13% of Americans are black. Half of Americans are women.

Back during the O.J. trial, the media kept up the drumbeat that if O.J. (a known wifebeater) were to be found guilty, there would be race riots all over the country. No one ever feared that if he were to be acquitted, the streets would be filled with women rioting about the injustice of letting a murdering misogynist off the hook.

Fast forward to today: Where is the media for all the women who have been trapped in their homes with violent men who beat them during these lockdowns? Where are the hundreds of thousands of people marching for Womens Lives Matter? Racial violence is wrong. Sexual violence still gets a pass.

There are calls to remove every single piece of art that depicts racial prejudice. But just about every old movie and TV show depicts negative stereotypes of women, as stupid, helpless, manipulative, dependent, fawning over their male "master." Where's the Woke outrage about that? If we use the same tactic to address sexism that's being used to address racism, then we should ban reruns of Father Knows Best, I Love Lucy, Bewitched, I Dream of Jeannie and every movie from the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's... While we're at it, let's ban all the James Bond movies for sexually objectifying women. Ban every pop song from Stand By Your Man to It's My Party and I'll Cry if I Want To, to The Beatles' Run for Your Life. Let's just ban everything, because everything is offensive to someone, somewhere. All you have to do is look hard enough and want to be offended.

Except don't ban any Grammy-winning album by a black rapper singing about murdering bitchez and hos; that would be censorship.

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

WEll worth a read!

I suspect this sh1t will end AFTER the election!
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...tats-and-logic

DNC area's will grow tired of Looting & suddenly find business shipping out of their soon to be bankrupt township. They call it off SMARTLY

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

Meantime in Liverpool

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/slavery-museum-bosses-speak-out-after-penny-lane-signs-are-vandalised/ar-BB15owrE?ocid=ientp

My Mum (87) tells me it was a Toll road................

Mike

[shiny!]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

WEll worth a read!

I suspect this sh1t will end AFTER the election!
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...tats-and-logic

DNC area's will grow tired of Looting & suddenly find business shipping out of their soon to be bankrupt township. They call it off SMARTLY

The letter you linked to is worth reprinting IMHO. The bolded parts are not mine.

UC Berkeley History Professor's Open Letter Against BLM, Police Brutality and Cultural Orthodoxy

Dear profs X, Y, Z

I am one of your colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley. I have met you both personally but do not know you closely, and am contacting you anonymously, with apologies. I am worried that writing this email publicly might lead to me losing my job, and likely all future jobs in my field.

In your recent departmental emails you mentioned our pledge to diversity, but I am increasingly alarmed by the absence of diversity of opinion on the topic of the recent protests and our community response to them.

In the extended links and resources you provided, I could not find a single instance of substantial counter-argument or alternative narrative to explain the under-representation of black individuals in academia or their over-representation in the criminal justice system. The explanation provided in your documentation, to the near exclusion of all others, is univariate: the problems of the black community are caused by whites, or, when whites are not physically present, by the infiltration of white supremacy and white systemic racism into American brains, souls, and institutions.

Many cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself, such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. These people are not racists or 'Uncle Toms'. They are intelligent scholars who reject a narrative that strips black people of agency and systematically externalizes the problems of the black community onto outsiders. Their view is entirely absent from the departmental and UCB-wide communiques.

The claim that the difficulties that the black community faces are entirely causally explained by exogenous factors in the form of white systemic racism, white supremacy, and other forms of white discrimination remains a problematic hypothesis that should be vigorously challenged by historians. Instead, it is being treated as an axiomatic and actionable truth without serious consideration of its profound flaws, or its worrying implication of total black impotence. This hypothesis is transforming our institution and our culture, without any space for dissent outside of a tightly policed, narrow discourse.

A counternarrative exists. If you have time, please consider examining some of the documents I attach at the end of this email. Overwhelmingly, the reasoning provided by BLM and allies is either primarily anecdotal (as in the case with the bulk of Ta-Nehisi Coates' undeniably moving article) or it is transparently motivated. As an example of the latter problem, consider the proportion of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However, if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it is anti-black.

Would we characterize criminal justice as a systemically misandrist conspiracy against innocent American men? I hope you see that this type of reasoning is flawed, and requires a significant suspension of our rational faculties. Black people are not incarcerated at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict. This fact has been demonstrated multiple times across multiple jurisdictions in multiple countries. (is this true? -shiny!)

And yet, I see my department uncritically reproducing a narrative that diminishes black agency in favor of a white-centric explanation that appeals to the department's apparent desire to shoulder the 'white man's burden' and to promote a narrative of white guilt.

If we claim that the criminal justice system is white-supremacist, why is it that Asian Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian Americans are incarcerated at vastly lower rates than white Americans? This is a funny sort of white supremacy. Even Jewish Americans are incarcerated less than gentile whites. I think it's fair to say that your average white supremacist disapproves of Jews. And yet, these alleged white supremacists incarcerate gentiles at vastly higher rates than Jews. None of this is addressed in your literature. None of this is explained, beyond hand-waving and ad hominems. "Those are racist dogwhistles". "The model minority myth is white supremacist". "Only fascists talk about black-on-black crime", ad nauseam.

These types of statements do not amount to counterarguments: they are simply arbitrary offensive classifications, intended to silence and oppress discourse. Any serious historian will recognize these for the silencing orthodoxy tactics they are, common to suppressive regimes, doctrines, and religions throughout time and space. They are intended to crush real diversity and permanently exile the culture of robust criticism from our department.

Increasingly, we are being called upon to comply and subscribe to BLM's problematic view of history, and the department is being presented as unified on the matter. In particular, ethnic minorities are being aggressively marshaled into a single position. Any apparent unity is surely a function of the fact that dissent could almost certainly lead to expulsion or cancellation for those of us in a precarious position, which is no small number.

I personally don't dare speak out against the BLM narrative, and with this barrage of alleged unity being mass-produced by the administration, tenured professoriat, the UC administration, corporate America, and the media, the punishment for dissent is a clear danger at a time of widespread economic vulnerability. I am certain that if my name were attached to this email, I would lose my job and all future jobs, even though I believe in and can justify every word I type.

The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people. There are virtually no marches for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is.

No discussion is permitted for nonblack victims of black violence, who proportionally outnumber black victims of nonblack violence. This is especially bitter in the Bay Area, where Asian victimization by black assailants has reached epidemic proportions, to the point that the SF police chief has advised Asians to stop hanging good-luck charms on their doors, as this attracts the attention of (overwhelmingly black) home invaders. Home invaders like George Floyd. For this actual, lived, physically experienced reality of violence in the USA, there are no marches, no tearful emails from departmental heads, no support from McDonald's and Wal-Mart. For the History department, our silence is not a mere abrogation of our duty to shed light on the truth: it is a rejection of it.

The claim that black intraracial violence is the product of redlining, slavery, and other injustices is a largely historical claim. It is for historians, therefore, to explain why Japanese internment or the massacre of European Jewry hasn't led to equivalent rates of dysfunction and low SES performance among Japanese and Jewish Americans respectively. Arab Americans have been viciously demonized since 9/11, as have Chinese Americans more recently. However, both groups outperform white Americans on nearly all SES indices - as do Nigerian Americans, who incidentally have black skin. It is for historians to point out and discuss these anomalies. However, no real discussion is possible in the current climate at our department. The explanation is provided to us, disagreement with it is racist, and the job of historians is to further explore additional ways in which the explanation is additionally correct. This is a mockery of the historical profession.

Most troublingly, our department appears to have been entirely captured by the interests of the Democratic National Convention, and the Democratic Party more broadly. To explain what I mean, consider what happens if you choose to donate to Black Lives Matter, an organization UCB History has explicitly promoted in its recent mailers. All donations to the official BLM website are immediately redirected to ActBlue Charities, an organization primarily concerned with bankrolling election campaigns for Democrat candidates. Donating to BLM today is to indirectly donate to Joe Biden's 2020 campaign. This is grotesque given the fact that the American cities with the worst rates of black-on-black violence and police-on-black violence are overwhelmingly Democrat-run. Minneapolis itself has been entirely in the hands of Democrats for over five decades; the 'systemic racism' there was built by successive Democrat administrations.

The patronizing and condescending attitudes of Democrat leaders towards the black community, exemplified by nearly every Biden statement on the black race, all but guarantee a perpetual state of misery, resentment, poverty, and the attendant grievance politics which are simultaneously annihilating American political discourse and black lives. And yet, donating to BLM is bankrolling the election campaigns of men like Mayor Frey, who saw their cities devolve into violence. This is a grotesque capture of a good-faith movement for necessary police reform, and of our department, by a political party. Even worse, there are virtually no avenues for dissent in academic circles. I refuse to serve the Party, and so should you.

The total alliance of major corporations involved in human exploitation with BLM should be a warning flag to us, and yet this damning evidence goes unnoticed, purposefully ignored, or perversely celebrated. We are the useful idiots of the wealthiest classes, carrying water for Jeff Bezos and other actual, real, modern-day slavers. Starbucks, an organisation using literal black slaves in its coffee plantation suppliers, is in favor of BLM. Sony, an organisation using cobalt mined by yet more literal black slaves, many of whom are children, is in favor of BLM. And so, apparently, are we. The absence of counter-narrative enables this obscenity. Fiat lux, indeed.

There also exists a large constituency of what can only be called 'race hustlers': hucksters of all colors who benefit from stoking the fires of racial conflict to secure administrative jobs, charity management positions, academic jobs and advancement, or personal political entrepreneurship.

Given the direction our history department appears to be taking far from any commitment to truth, we can regard ourselves as a formative training institution for this brand of snake-oil salespeople. Their activities are corrosive, demolishing any hope at harmonious racial coexistence in our nation and colonizing our political and institutional life. Many of their voices are unironically segregationist.

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

Oh how right they were:-

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

[Mega]

Re: Are we heading for a Race war?

[shiny!]

Oppression Obsession

THIS!

[Mega]

Re: Oppression Obsession