The Anti-White Party

[Markle]

That's a lie and your president gave himself and his rich buddies a permanent tax cut. The rural poor got a temporary one. You republicans are just idiots who fall for any racist, sexist or homophobic bigotry in order to blame people for the problems you created.

As you know, the reason for the temporary status of some of the tax cuts was due to Democrats.

 

[protectionist]

1. The reasons the city government gave for their actions, are universal in our society, supporting my "widespread anti-white discrimination" claim.

2. What does it matter what the current personnel landscape today is?

I read "the reasons". If numerous scenarios as this isolated case were occurring regularly on a national basis, that would be different, but that is not happening. And the landscape TODAY has plenty to do with it.

If the same scenario continued to replay itself, that would obviously mean that no progress was made towards abating what you believe is "widespead discrimination".

From all indications it was at worst, a one off situation where the parties alleging discrimination were compensated.

If you want to choose ANY profession or classroom in America, currently white males typically meet or exceed what their population share as a demographic is.

And since you used ONE case in ONE fire department from 11 years ago, let's look at ALL of them.

Nationally on the average, 96% of U.S. career firefighters are men, and 82% are white.

That is just one profession. Feel free to choose another, the statistics will likely be similar.

What do you think the reason is, that most professions or firefighting departments are mostly white?

What do you think? And in light of your question, why would you allege that "the country in rife with anti white discrimination", based on the employment numbers?

1. I think the low numbers are a result of poor education outcome, which we know is primarily driven by parent involvement, and likely a direct result of the high rate of illegitimacy in the black community.


2. I ask you again, what do you think the reason is?


3. Because unequal outcome does not prove that there is not countervailing discrimination. Discrimination that is still a valid issue to be fought against.

What you think is garbage son.

The root cause of the problems blacks face is white racism. There is plenty of evidence supporting my comment and the ignorant stereotypes you used in your post are not evidence of anything but a belief of a dumb ass white racist on the internet. We can use the same anecdotal evidence to destroy your argument and I will blast your first point to make an example out of you.

" 1. I think the low numbers are a result of poor education outcome, which we know is primarily driven by parent involvement, and likely a direct result of the high rate of illegitimacy in the black community."

Barack Obama Jr., 44th president of the United States. Single parent home. Graduated with honors from Harvard. Becomes President of the United States. I think that's a little bit higher than a firefighter son. So again let me say, you think like Nelly. Nelly thought shit was jelly.

But Obama got there by Affirmative Action. He was invalid.

 

[Markle]

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

I'm curious. Why would you think you would have to do something morally wrong to attain a six-figure salary?

I was a Realtor for over 45 years. I was also a real estate instructor and professional speaker. For the last half or so of my career, I earned well into six figures and never felt I was doing anything immoral. Yes, I have a BA but it is in a very different field. I never had a "salary" since I was in my mid 20's. As a Realtor, I worked as an independent contractor, in business for myself.

I also owned my own business (for 12 years). I found that I could make more money if I did things that weren't right.

No mystery about this. In all fields, businesses can increase profits if they're willing to go outside bounds of propriety. That's why we have building construction codes, laws on air & water pollution, automobile manufacturing safety regulations, drugs, etc

I just think that making such a blanket statement is patently false. I know dozens of other Realtors who make well into six-figures who have never done anything unethical or immoral regarding their business.

 

[protectionist]

[

When I see compelling evidence that there is "widespread anti white discrimination," I will be the first to acknowledge. As of now, there is no such evidence, as far as what is required to live at an acceptable standard in this country.

It is not visible in the public or private job sector, the judicial system, nor anywhere else.

And far as my so called "tolerance of racism", I have personally seen ACTUAL violent racism towards black citizens, including my own parents for peacefully demonstrating for basic rights of citizenship.

Water hoses, rabid feral cops, attack dogs, refusal of service in public establishments...etc.

I have never witnessed any white people in America under the same type of attack. If I did, I would certainly be against it.

Not visible in the public job sector? ****** need not apply is the watchword for civil service jobs and has been for decades.

{Though 10 percent of the U.S. civilian labor force, African-Americans are 18 percent of U.S. government workers. They are 25 percent of the employees at Treasury and Veterans Affairs, 31 percent of the State Department, 37 percent of Department of Education employees and 38 percent of Housing and Urban Development. They are 42 percent of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., 55 percent of the employees at the Government Printing Office and 82 percent at the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency.}

Black America vs. Obama?

As for violence against blacks, I've seen old films from the 40's and 50's, never anything in real life. Violence I've seen up close and personal is the Los Angeles riots, black on white violence, I was at Telegraph and Florence when it broke loose. That's about 10 miles east of Normandie in Santa Fe Springs. Blacks were cruising Florence looking for white victims, I had a gun pointed at my head from a car that pulled along to the left. I slammed the brakes on and went down a side street and kept to side streets until I got into Whittier, LAPD under Daryl Gates said "let it burn," luckily Whittier took a different approach. So I got out alive and learned to carry a gun.

Since then I've seen Ferguson and Black Lives Matter. *In every single case, the violence was black on white. I have never met a Klansman in my 60 years on this earth, not even one.

In low level government positions some blacks have made gains in jobs that pay less than average compared to the private sector, and though white males are 31% of the population in America, they still hold over 70% of managerial positions. And hold the majority of supervisory positions in the fields that you mentioned.


As far as violence against blacks, if you were around in the 1960's there are plenty of archived videos that be as accessed from that era, that shows what I am talking about. In fact, here is one:

Bloody Sunday: A flashback of the landmark Selma to Montgomery marches


As far as "Klansmen", go they have reinvented themselves and rebranded themselves to appear to be different. The internet is their most effective to marketing their facade.

In my 60+ years I have encountered KKK members Neo Nazi's and Skinheads up until as recently as the 90's.

And there certainly enough examples in this forum alone to prove that those kind beliefs are far from being obsolete.

Your life experience has obviously been different than mine.

I've met some genuine racists on this board, ShitsHisSpeedos, Asslips, IM2, and I call them all out, white, black or other. But none of them were or are Klansmen, just loudmouths on the internet.

I'm not a racist but you are. You call me a racist for pointing out white racism in the race/racism section of a discussion forum. You're a joke.

Almost EVERYBODY in this forum calls you a racist. Guess why.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

The charge by liberals in Iowa was to cover for the incompetence of the party in the counting of the votes...proof of that is New Hampshire is whiter than Iowa and no such aspergians were cast there since it would call attention to just how lily white bernie and warren are in their everyday lives.

 

[protectionist]

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

I'm curious. Why would you think you would have to do something morally wrong to attain a six-figure salary?

I was a Realtor for over 45 years. I was also a real estate instructor and professional speaker. For the last half or so of my career, I earned well into six figures and never felt I was doing anything immoral. Yes, I have a BA but it is in a very different field. I never had a "salary" since I was in my mid 20's. As a Realtor, I worked as an independent contractor, in business for myself.

I also owned my own business (for 12 years). I found that I could make more money if I did things that weren't right.

No mystery about this. In all fields, businesses can increase profits if they're willing to go outside bounds of propriety. That's why we have building construction codes, laws on air & water pollution, automobile manufacturing safety regulations, drugs, etc

I just think that making such a blanket statement is patently false. I know dozens of other Realtors who make well into six-figures who have never done anything unethical or immoral regarding their business.

It was not a blanket statement. I was just talking about myself, in my particular business, and at a particular time (1980s)

So you didn't do anything immoral. Cool. I'm happy for you

 

[katsteve2012]

I made six figures by my 30’s. You just need an education, which you clearly don’t have.

1. I was in my 20s when I made 6 figures for 3 years straight.

,2. My point was it' s a BAD thing, not good. Are you awake, yet, at 9:15 am ?

Why is it a bad thing?

I

I made six figures by my 30’s. You just need an education, which you clearly don’t have.

1. I was in my 20s when I made 6 figures for 3 years straight.

,2. My point was it' s a BAD thing, not good. Are you awake, yet, at 9:15 am ?

Why is it a bad thing?

I elucidated that in the post you quoted. Read slower ?

I read what you posted, and you "elucidated" that you felt for a six figure salary that "you could be doing something that is morally wrong".....or did you forget?

No reason to ask if I forgot. I was informing you that I had already answered your question (of why it was a bad thing), and you already had your answer.

So if you knew why I said that I had a feeling about it being a bad thing, because of being morally wrong, why ask ?

The only reason I asked, is that "six figure" incomes are not uncommon in todays environment. And considering where one lives it may not even go a long way. From 1989 until I retired, I earned well over six figures, and never did anything wrong except maybe spent too much time away from my family while working.

As another example, I have a brother in law who is just a journeyman pipefitter.

He routinely earns over 100k annually, and does nothing that is "morally" wrong.

And he certainly is not rolling in a bed of money.

Your statement seemed to be rather odd, at best.

Anyway, you obviously live in your own world.....maybe even your own "universe".

 

[Asclepias]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

"Wait a minute, whites built this country."

You fabulistic white boys are good with the jokes.

 

[bluzman61]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

"Wait a minute, whites built this country."

You fabulistic white boys are good with the jokes.

We DID build this country, ya knucklehead. ALL of our major forefathers from the late 1700's were WHITE.

 

[Asclepias]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

"Wait a minute, whites built this country."

You fabulistic white boys are good with the jokes.

We DID build this country, ya knucklehead. ALL of our major forefathers from the late 1700's were WHITE.

Those white guys died whenever they went outside. There was a reason the Confederates whined like babies over the end of slavery. They knew for a fact they were not built to do work. They were simply too weak.

This country was built by Blacks and they didnt even get paid for doing it.

 

[Bo Didleysquat]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

William S. Lind (born July 9, 1947) is an American conservative author, described as being aligned with paleoconservatism.[1] He is the author of many books and one of the first proponents of fourth-generation warfare (4GW) theory. Director of The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation.[2] He used the pseudonym Thomas Hobbes in a column for The American Conservative.[3][4]

He is also the son-in-law of widely known Walt Disney.

William S. Lind - Wikipedia

 

[Zorro!]

So you are saying that non-Jewish folks are not productive? There are lots of people of other faiths who think, too. Christians. for instance, have a pretty good intellectual output as well, but the only people who get attention are dumb piss-pots like graham and falwell.

BTW: why does discussion of "intersectional feminism" bother you?

No I didn't say that. Intersectional feminism is just another branch of Marxism and that's why it "bothers" me.

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

A six figure salary is attainable and is standard in any middle or upper middle management position that is worth showing up for. In fact, earning that much only places one in the middle class.

Yup. Trump Boom lifted those folks right up over the $100k/yr line.

 

[Zorro!]

Too many to mention. The most influential intellectuals responsible for modern radical left politics (an existential threat to white, western society) are almost all Jews. Marx, for example. Campus sociology courses are almost entirely dominated by Marx inspired theories such as critical theory, intersectional feminism and the truly racist "whiteness studies". The thought leaders of these movements are overwhelmingly Jewish.

So you are saying that non-Jewish folks are not productive? There are lots of people of other faiths who think, too. Christians. for instance, have a pretty good intellectual output as well, but the only people who get attention are dumb piss-pots like graham and falwell.

BTW: why does discussion of "intersectional feminism" bother you?

No I didn't say that. Intersectional feminism is just another branch of Marxism and that's why it "bothers" me.

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

"Almost never"
"Would have to do something morally wrong to attain that"

Well did you or didn't you? And if earning involved pulling your pants down, I don't want any details.

 

[bluzman61]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

"Wait a minute, whites built this country."

You fabulistic white boys are good with the jokes.

We DID build this country, ya knucklehead. ALL of our major forefathers from the late 1700's were WHITE.

Those white guys died whenever they went outside. There was a reason the Confederates whined like babies over the end of slavery. They knew for a fact they were not built to do work. They were simply too weak.

This country was built by Blacks and they didnt even get paid for doing it.

You really ARE an idiot. Thanks for showing this once AGAIN.

 

[katsteve2012]

No I didn't say that. Intersectional feminism is just another branch of Marxism and that's why it "bothers" me.

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

A six figure salary is attainable and is standard in any middle or upper middle management position that is worth showing up for. In fact, earning that much only places one in the middle class.

Yup. Trump Boom lifted those folks right up over the $100k/yr line.

Nothing to do with Trump. I know a plethora of people who were earning well over six figures when he was still promoting boxing matches with that other crook, Don King.

 

[protectionist]

1. I was in my 20s when I made 6 figures for 3 years straight.

,2. My point was it' s a BAD thing, not good. Are you awake, yet, at 9:15 am ?

Why is it a bad thing?

I

1. I was in my 20s when I made 6 figures for 3 years straight.

,2. My point was it' s a BAD thing, not good. Are you awake, yet, at 9:15 am ?

Why is it a bad thing?

I elucidated that in the post you quoted. Read slower ?

I read what you posted, and you "elucidated" that you felt for a six figure salary that "you could be doing something that is morally wrong".....or did you forget?

No reason to ask if I forgot. I was informing you that I had already answered your question (of why it was a bad thing), and you already had your answer.

So if you knew why I said that I had a feeling about it being a bad thing, because of being morally wrong, why ask ?

The only reason I asked, is that "six figure" incomes are not uncommon in todays environment. And considering where one lives it may not even go a long way. From 1989 until I retired, I earned well over six figures, and never did anything wrong except maybe spent too much time away from my family while working.

As another example, I have a brother in law who is just a journeyman pipefitter.

He routinely earns over 100k annually, and does nothing that is "morally" wrong.

And he certainly is not rolling in a bed of money.

Your statement seemed to be rather odd, at best.

Anyway, you obviously live in your own world.....maybe even your own "universe".

Wrong things often lie bit below the surface, not always apparent. They most often arise not much to employees, but more so to business owners, and especially when business is dropping off a bit, when the owner may be forced to break some of his own rules, just to keep things going.

So you may not have been in the type of scenario that I refer to, but it doesn't surprise me that a guy who doesn't see anything wrong with Affirmative Action, would not see other wrong things so readily, either.

It hardly matters to me if what I say seems "odd" to folks who, themselves, seem odd to me.

 

[protectionist]

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

A six figure salary is attainable and is standard in any middle or upper middle management position that is worth showing up for. In fact, earning that much only places one in the middle class.

Yup. Trump Boom lifted those folks right up over the $100k/yr line.

Nothing to do with Trump. I know a plethora of people who were earning well over six figures when he was still promoting boxing matches with that other crook, Don King.

Has everything to do with Trump. The median wage, under Trump, has reached it's highest level in US history.

You deny all you want, as liberals do, but you can't change the facts, and they're not with you.

 

[protectionist]

So you are saying that non-Jewish folks are not productive? There are lots of people of other faiths who think, too. Christians. for instance, have a pretty good intellectual output as well, but the only people who get attention are dumb piss-pots like graham and falwell.

BTW: why does discussion of "intersectional feminism" bother you?

No I didn't say that. Intersectional feminism is just another branch of Marxism and that's why it "bothers" me.

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

I'm rather comfortable saying that I'm in my 70s, and I almost never had a six-figure salary. I just have the feeling that I would have had to be doing something morally wrong to attain that.

"Almost never"
"Would have to do something morally wrong to attain that"

Well did you or didn't you? And if earning involved pulling your pants down, I don't want any details.

"Almost never" means there were 3 years out of 50 in the workforce, when I had a 6 figure income.

As for the pants, if you don't want to hear about something, it's best to not bring it up. And I don't like the way they you talk. If you said that stuff to me in person, you'd be in considerable danger of having your face kicked in.

I'll give you some credit though for that picture of Chuck Todd and the Democrats. It may seem humorous, but it is quite true. They represent a lot of people in a govt handout culture, who, jobs aren't what they're looking for. Important point, often overlooked.

 

[protectionist]

The Anti-White Party
William S. Lind
Dec 02,2019

An outtake in an article in the November 14 New York Times about the Iowa caucuses caused me to do a double take: “Democrats question the status of a state that’s 90% white.”

Imagine that the Times had instead said, “Republicans question the status of a state that’s heavily black,” or “GOP questions the status of a state that’s largely Hispanic.” The crises of outrage would reach to the heavens. Every Establishment organ would demand the Republicans pee all over themselves, grovel in the dust, and kiss the feet of so-called black and Hispanic “leaders”, most of whom are con artists. But when the Democrats dismiss a state because it’s largely white? Not a murmur of protest arose from any quarter.

Along with a growing number of other white Americans, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, whites built this country. We took a vast wilderness inhabited by a few million howling savages (who unlike their cousins in Mexico and Central America had built no civilizations) and turned it into what was, as recently as the 1950s, the best country on earth of all time. The contribution of other races was mostly muscle, not brains. In that respect, they stand well back from the ox, mule, and horse. And now we are to stand mute as Democrats make us a despised minority in our own country? I don’t think so.”

The Democratic Party’s hostility toward whites is a product of the broader ideology that party has embraced, the ideology of cultural Marxism, which is commonly known as “political correctness” or “multiculturalism”. Like Moscow’s old Marxism-Leninism, cultural Marxism says certain kinds of people are a priori good and others evil, regardless of what individuals do. In Marxism-Leninism, workers and peasants are good while landlords, capitalists and members of the middle class, the bourgeoisie, are evil. The latter are fit only to be “liquidated”, which Soviet Communism did on a scale that put Hitler to shame: not six million dead, but sixty million. (Ever notice how people on the Left swoon at the sight of a swastika but find the hammer and sickle gently amusing?)

Cultural Marxism says whites are inherently evil “oppressors” who must constantly beg blacks, Indians, immigrants, etc. to forgive their “white privilege”. The average white family living paycheck-to-paycheck doesn’t see a lot of privilege ......

Read the rest ****** @
The Anti-White Party – traditionalRIGHT

View attachment 293752

"Wait a minute, whites built this country."

You fabulistic white boys are good with the jokes.

We DID build this country, ya knucklehead. ALL of our major forefathers from the late 1700's were WHITE.

Those white guys died whenever they went outside. There was a reason the Confederates whined like babies over the end of slavery. They knew for a fact they were not built to do work. They were simply too weak.

This country was built by Blacks and they didnt even get paid for doing it.

When I was a construction worker in the Army Corps of Engineers, we did the hardest work you probably couldn't even dream about. 95% of the guys were white.

We built the M4T6 bridge, entirely by hand. No cranes. Good thing you weren't there.You might have fainted just watching us.

 

[Zorro!]

Too many to mention. The most influential intellectuals responsible for modern radical left politics (an existential threat to white, western society) are almost all Jews. Marx, for example. Campus sociology courses are almost entirely dominated by Marx inspired theories such as critical theory, intersectional feminism and the truly racist "whiteness studies". The thought leaders of these movements are overwhelmingly Jewish.

So you are saying that non-Jewish folks are not productive? There are lots of people of other faiths who think, too. Christians. for instance, have a pretty good intellectual output as well, but the only people who get attention are dumb piss-pots like graham and falwell.

BTW: why does discussion of "intersectional feminism" bother you?

No I didn't say that. Intersectional feminism is just another branch of Marxism and that's why it "bothers" me.

So prepare a course in "white male studies," as if all the history that has been taught in schools historically has not been "white male studies." Were you even taught the history of how women, and women and men who were are not white achieved the vote to admit them to participation in the democratic republic, de facto as well as du jour? These studies simply fill in what was falsely admitted from the general study of history.

Your argument (is it an actual argument?) that intersectional feminism" is a "branch of Marxism" is laughable, whatever your definition of marxism is. You are just being dismissive as a sign of your lack of courage to consider how people live and have lived different lives from your own. Real people. Your fellow humans. Why the cowardice?

My Feminism is Intersectional – It’s Both White and Upper Class

I’m a feminist (obviously!). I believe that women should be treated equally and have the same rights in society as men do. I also know that feminism has to be intersectional for it to be worth it. And that’s why my feminism is intersectional: it’s both upper class and white.

There are plenty of activists, celebrities, and academics whose feminism already focuses on the intersections of feminism and race and class, but I take it to the next level by making sure mine is both racist and classist. And by focusing on preserving both my wealth and my whiteness, it means I am doing more work to address the complexities of feminism and specifically how it affects me.

I’m tired of the old, flawed feminism that relied on an essentialist view of men and women, talking only about women getting in the workforce and out of the kitchen. To me, feminism is so much more than that: It’s about earning a six-figure salary and never, ever entering my chef’s kitchen in my rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. That’s just the kind of feminist I am.

Hillary Clinton, Taylor Swift, Lena Dunham – all of these wealthy white women have done amazing things to uplift other wealthy white women. They also share my commitment to intersectional feminism that lifts up both whiteness and wealth without sacrificing one for the other. That’s the kind of complexity intersectional feminism needs – one that lifts up the issues that only I am capable of seeing.

Look, I care deeply about feminism, and it’s so important for women to know that it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Everyone’s personal idea of feminism needs consider the intricacies that can influence a woman’s existence in this world. And although whiteness and wealth tend to only influence my existence in a markedly positive way, that doesn’t make me any less intersectional.

Hillary Clinton didn't do much to uplift Mary Mahoney. She was in on the killing of Mary and the other 2 Starbucks employees.
Monica Lewinsky played a part in it too. It wasn't all Bad Bill as the perpetrator.

Clinton's are stone cold killers: Murder of Clinton Intern Mary Mahoney - AR15.COM

The Mysterious Murder Of Mary Mahoney