Category: Racism and Xenophobia (Page 1 of 3)

Facebook speech code: No, white men aren’t a “protected class”

Facebook treats everyone equally. Leftists wants whites and men to be at the bottom of the hierarchy.

A new misleading article is going viral on leftist and liberal-leaning social-political websites. ProPublica reports that white men are a protected class on Facebook, and that criticism of white men is considered hate speech.

Sure enough, hateful attacks against white men are considered hate speech and subject to possible deletion–just as a group of liberals have long said they wanted social media to take a harder stand on hate speech. So, too, are attacks on black men, white women, black women, Asian men, Asian women, Hispanic men, Hispanic women, Muslim men, and Muslim women considered hate speech.

Attacks on any such ethnic-gender (or religion) combination group are hate speech. ProPublica’s problem and that of those sharing the article is that they don’t want whites or men to have equal rights.

There’s nothing confusing in Facebook’s position. It’s spelled out in black and white–literally–in the slides:



How did a policy of policing hate speech impartially, without favor, turn into allegations of pro-white bias?

Read More

Post-election survey finds ethnocentric, identity politics factors in election

Trump supporters don’t terribly like immigrants or Muslims, and white Democrats like African-Americans more than white Americans.

Those are some of the findings of a large-scaled post-election study by John Sides, professor of political science at George Washington University. The survey data comes from multiple surveys by YouGov of 45,000 respondents, including 8,000 respondents who were interviewed both in 2011-2012 and 2016. One of the questions asked voters to rate certain ethnic and religious groups on a thermometer scale:

A few things that can be said:
– For all groups surveyed, immigrants and Muslims rated second to last and last, respectively, but the difference was much greater with Republicans and Trump primary voters.
– Trump voters ranked white people more favorably than any other group ranked them and ranked minorities (excluding Jews) lower than every other group.
– While Trump voters ranked Jews slightly lower than did Republicans as a whole, their rating of Jews is lined up pretty evenly with the rating of Jews by Democrats, white Democrats, and the population at large–around 75.
– Democrats ranked blacks, Hispanics, and Jews noticeably higher than they ranked whites. Even white Democrats ranked blacks and Jews slightly higher than they ranked whites. The gap in the ratings of whites by Democrats as a whole is thus due partially, but not entirely, to the fact that there were many more blacks and Hispanics represented in the survey sample of “Democrats” (as opposed to “white Democrats”).

Read More

How left-wing smears about racism come back to bite them

One of the most often heard complaints about politically correct liberals is that they try to smear everyone with whom they disagree as bigots. “Racist,” “sexist,” “transphobe,” “transmisogynistic”… The terms are thrown around so often that many people stop listening.

Often people disagree about what constitutes bigotry. But just as often people disagree about the context and what was actually said. While I was listening to the podcast Undisclosed, I was treated to an example of how casually self-righteous liberals can fabricate racially-charged accusations, perhaps without even being conscious of it.

Undisclosed operates in seasons that usually take on cases of someone whom the team of three lawyers, Rabia Chaudry, Colin Miller, and Susan Simpson, thinks was wrongly convicted of a crime. They present the story and the evidence, as they see it, and argue why the convict wasn’t guilty. For the past few months, however, the story they are presenting is different: They are arguing why they think the Baltimore police officers involved in the arrest of Freddie Gray are guilty.

It’s a bit of an interesting turn for the attorneys, who usually argue someone’s innocence, to take a hard stance against people who were charged with crimes on shaky grounds. Maybe it shows the group is focused on the politics of identity–race and power structures–rather than defending the civil rights of anyone accused of a crime. Or maybe they are just continuing their mission of defending the public against heavy-handed tactics of the corrupt police and justice system that, in their view, mistreated and killed an innocent man. Either way, they ought not make up lies about subjects involved.

On episode 14, when talking about the protests that turned into riots, the host stated, “The nation saw the mayor unable to communicate to her own city, awkwardly trying to say that she respects civil liberties but then referring to protesters as ‘thugs’.”

“Referring to protesters as ‘thugs’…” Does anyone remember when Baltimore Mayor Stefanie Rawlings-Blake, a liberal Democrat and an African-American woman, said that? I seem to recall exactly the quote they were thinking of, and she didn’t at all refer to “protesters” as “thugs.”

Just to make sure I was remembering right, I looked it up:

Read More

Careful of labels: The Tommy Robinson vs Quilliam story

On May 2, the Quilliam anti-extremist organisation in London was the site of an altercation between Quilliam members and Tommy Robinson, formerly of the English Defence League, and a cameraman. Tommy now works for the British branch of Ezra Levant’s right-wing Canadian news network, Rebel Media.

Tommy had gone to the offices of Quilliam to complain about an article in The Guardian newspaper by Quilliam’s researcher named Julia Ebner, about the rise in right-wing extremism in the UK, and how it and Islamist extremism feed off each other. This broad point is often well made and cogently put by Quilliam members like Maajid Nawaz, Adam Deen and Haras Rafiq who is Quilliams’ CEO. It is a convincing case for how extremism on all ideological fringes breeds a mirror image reaction on the opposite fringe.

The issue Tommy had with the article was with this specific paragraph, with the most contentious section highlighted:
That the far right has moved from the fringe into the mainstream demonstrates the massive support that white supremacist movements have attracted from digital natives. Their online followership often exceeds that of mainstream political parties: with over 200,000 followers, Tommy Robinson’s Twitter account has almost the same number of followers as Theresa May’s.

Tommy decided to confront the article’s author by going to see her at Quilliam’s London headquarters. As seen in the video uploaded to Rebel Media’s Youtube channel, Tommy tried to gain access to the building, was asked by Adam Deen if he had an invitation, and when he said he didn’t was asked to leave. Tommy then proceeded to interrogate Deen about whether he thought he was a white supremacist.

Once he was on his own, he re-entered the ground floor lobby, and given no-one was around, decided to go downstairs to see who he could find. Having done this, he ran into the various staff members and researchers who make up the Quilliam team, found Julia in a small conference room with other members, and proceeded to shove his microphone in their faces, while his cameraman filmed them all. A scuffle ensued when Deen tried to stop the incident by apparently grabbing Tommy’s microphone and recording equipment attempting to stop the cameraman filming. Tommy spoke to Haras Rafiq, and the police who were called then escorted Tommy and his cameraman off the premises.

Let me be plain. This was absolutely unacceptable conduct on Tommy Robinson’s part. He violated Quilliam’s security, and the organisation has now had an emergency relocation to new secure premises. He trespassed without permission, and intimidated members of their staff. This, despite all his protestations, made him look like the aggressor rather than the victim, the opposite of his aim. Also, he lost credibility in insisting he’s not an extremist when he copied tactics used by Islamist and other far-right organisations like Al-Muhajiron and Britain First. Added to this, the reaction of members of Quilliam’s staff, who understandably felt surprised and threatened was non-conducive to de-escalating the potential for physical conflict, as their snatching of the microphone and other film equipment only made the situation worse.IMG_0139

That said, let’s consider why Tommy was there, while in no way offering it as an excuse for his actions. Maajid Nawaz and Haras Rafiq have gone on record and repeatedly stated that they do not believe Tommy is a white supremacist, and that the article, which they had no editorial oversight over, was not intentionally worded to portray him as such. That’s all very well, but as Andrew Neill said on the BBC’s Daily Politics, the sentence structure and its chronology strongly implies that Tommy is a white supremacist. Despite Maajid Nawaz’s protestations to the contrary, there is no getting around this. Apparently English is Julia Ebner’s 3rd language, so it is perhaps understandable that her wording could be considered a little awkward in places. However, this is also little comfort as it shows the laxness of the editorial process both within Quilliam up to this point and at The Guardian. 

Read More

My new essay; and you might need a trigger warning

My new long essay published, on EU, Merkel, migration, etc.

Ross Douthat once earlier pointed out, this Europe bound flow will never stop unless the structural problem of Africa as a continent are solved. Problems like exploding population, conflicts, industrial stagnation, social tribalism and exploitation of finite natural resources. Question is how will that be solved, by another intervention, or by creating buffer zones between Europe and Africa/Middle East? Who will police these buffer zones? What about genuine high educated migrants facing racial attacks, as a backlash by native population, who don’t differentiate between an illegal migrant and a research scholar with a valid visa who might actually be beneficial for the host society? Why would someone even want to take the legal route anymore, if all laws and borders break down anyway?

I write about some other questions, amidst what one might arguably call, a European disintegration.

Read it here.

Here are the #deplorables

Last week Hillary Clinton said, “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. … But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change.”

Donald Trump seized on those comments, making an ad out of it, and his supporters on Twitter got offended, claiming that Hillary was “attacking half of America,” and adopted the term for themselves. Donald Trump Jr tweeted an image of himself cast in a movie with other deplorable individuals, like conspiracy theorist and Trump source of information Alex Jones.

Who were those people in the #BasketOfDeplorables Hillary was talking about? Do they really exist? Presenting a few examples:

Read More

Trump “conservatives” admit they don’t care about policy

Trump’s campaign has stripped from much of the “conservative” movement the illusion that they care about policy. Entertainers like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity just want listeners. Politicians just want power. Many of the voters just want someone who looks like them and espouses vague cultural views with which they agree.

This theory has been proven clearly this election cycle, and now even the power players are close to publicly admitting it. When Trump expressed support for universal healthcare and expressed every position under the sun on other issues, it was evident that policies didn’t matter for his supporters, but it was not evident that they themselves knew it. It was possible they could have been deluded, believing in Trump.

Trump’s flip-flops and fake positions have been coming quicker and quicker now that he’s trying his “pivot” with two months left till the election. He followed through with a “softening” of sorts on illegal immigration, giving up his promise to deport all 11 million illegal aliens. (That wasn’t necessarily a conservative position, but it was one that his supporters presumably supported.) Now that he made a show of claiming to have proposed a maternity leave plan, leading self-proclaimed conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh threw aside concerns about the impact of the “big government” program.

Rush said:

I think they’re gonna respond so positively to this, and it’s gonna disappoint a lot of people. “Oh, my God, do people not even understand the whole concept of Big Government destroying the country?” They don’t, folks. They don’t look at it the way you and I do in that regard.

Read More

How Paul LePage’s 2010, 14 campaigns previewed Trump

If you want to know how the Republican Party became conditioned and tolerate and nominate Donald Trump, look at the northeasternmost state in the union, Maine, and its Republican governor, Paul LePage.

An angry racist who makes deranged and violent comments, LePage’s approval rating has been plummeting since a series of racist comments he has made this year. In August he sent went on a profanity-filled tirade to a Democratic lawmaker’s answering machine, and then he held a press conference in which he said, “[T]he enemy right now, the overwhelming majority right now coming in are people of color or people of Hispanic origin. I can’t help that. I just can’t help it. Those are the facts.” In January LePage said that black drug dealers were coming from “Connecticut and New York” and “impregnat[ing] a young, white girl before they leave.”

Now that he’s been exposed as a terrible politician, on top of a racist, and become an embarrassment to the GOP, it’s hard to think how he was once considered a rising star. But as recently as just two years ago, the Republican Governors Association featured LePage in a video in their “American Comeback” series.

Republicans gushed over him for his “political incorrectness,” the fact that he talked like an “average Joe,” his unapologetic campaign against welfare, and the fact that he “took on” the media. In short, many of the same things they like(d) about Trump.

A 2014 article by Jay Nordlinger in National Review highlights some of those points and foreshadows the racism he would unleash a few years later.

The article “Maine Journal, Part III,” part of a series, opens with some claims about a prescription drug abuse “crisis” reportedly taking place in Maine, the very thing that has been bemoaned by white Trump supporters when it happens in small white-majority towns. You can hear overtures of LePage’s comments about drug dealers in Nordlinger’s nut graph: “Dealers from Brooklyn and other such places find a ready market here.”

Coming from where? Brooklyn? Just like LePage, Nordlinger subtly blamed the crisis on out-of-state dealers. (The article doesn’t point to any numbers on the source of the drugs, or where the dealers are coming from. It doesn’t mention how many dealers are Maine natives or how many Maine natives go to other states to sell drugs. Naming New York or a specific borough of New York that isn’t Manhattan, well, one can only speculate…)

Much of the article is written in bullet points. In one, Nordlinger wrote, “Traveling around Maine, and hearing about it, I think, “This is a textbook example of what Charles Murray is talking about.” Two years ago, the famed political scientist wrote Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010.”

As can be seen from the title of Murray’s book, Murray’s book was focused specifically on white people. Why should race be such a factor? In Murray’s case (and perhaps other conservatives), he had been attacked as racist by liberals for a previous book of his, The Bell Curve, that posited differences in IQs across America were linked in part to genetics. By limiting his critique to white Americans, he could avoid such critiques this time around. Also, it is arguable that white poverty is, in and of itself, an underexplored issue, as such issues as drug abuse are more often associated with “the black community” (both by humanitarians who want to help stop it and by racists). One problem with focusing on drug abuse by white Americans, however, is the potential for double standards to exist where sympathy is heaped on white drug users, that isn’t shown for black drug users, and blame is thrown on “guys with the name D-Money, Smothie, Shifty … who come to Maine from New York and Connecticut … and impregnate a young, white girl before they leave” (in the words of LePage).

Nordlinger wrote

Read More

Trump’s trend of bigotry can’t be easily excused

Donald Trump on July 2 tweeted an image of Hillary Clinton in front of a pile of money with the quote “Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!” inside the outline of a Star of David. As usual with acts of bigotry from Trump, Trump’s defenders are out in full force to defend him.

22 copy

“That’s not a Star of David, it’s just “a star”,” Mary Ann Arlotta wrote on Facebook.

“I’m fairly certain that same shape is on Microsoft PowerPoint,” Rhea Paseur wrote.

Mark Ross wrote, “Some call it the satanic star while others call it the Star of David.” (The pentagram, aka “the satanic star,” has five sides, but anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists do consider the Star of David to be a “Satanic Hexagram.”)

This is becoming a familiar pattern in the Trump campaign: Trump does something bigoted and/or incredibly stupid. Trump fans, whom Trump joked would support him if he killed someone on 5th Avenue, display their gymnastics abilities by defending him.

As Facebook user Kevin Wos wrote, in an explanation that anyone with the faintest understanding of history doesn’t need to read, “Oh yeah, because a Star of David combined with images of money and talk of corruption couldn’t possibly be a dog whistle for the far right. Nope, not anti-Semitic at all!”

The issue, furthermore, comes down to reputation and track record. People are granted a number of mistakes. Trump deleted this tweet afterwards and reuploaded the same image with a circle in the place of the Star of David, so one might be charitable if it was the first time he said or did something bigoted against a minority ethnic group.

Read More

There’s a simple way to stop this protest madness at the Universities

Barely a month since I came back after a short trip to Oxford, I read about Yale students protesting against their English courses; the courses being too colonial and White. The organisers of this movement, are helped and organized by a faculty professor, newly appointed, named Dr Jill Richards, her claim to fame is having done pioneering research on Queer resistance cells during Second World war and attending a “Commie camp”.

Without pointing out the statistically insignificant effect of any Queer resistance cells anywhere in any time, affecting the broader geopolitics, it is ironic that she rallies and encourages students against the same “Western civilization” which fought against the epitome of state terrors in both Marxist and Nazi societies, when they were systematically killing people on the basis of their freedom of speech and sexuality. But there’s a broader significance in all of it.

In Mizzou, the protesters were aided and their rage channelized by Professors, notable among them is the now discredited Dr Melissa Click, herself with post-structural far-leftist sympathies. In this side of the pond, the BBC’s new Midsummer Night’s Dream is unashamedly edited and altered in the light if the narrative of a director with a distinct and vocal social agenda. White lecturers cannot attend equality conference, simply because they are white, In UK. I am not white by ethnicity, and I say this now, if this is not racism, I don’t know what it.

Without going into any further orotund circumlocution, here’s the simple hypothesis. 

Read More

Page 1 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Get the most important and interesting articles right at your inbox. Sign up for B+D periodic emails.