193 Comments
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

I have a slightly different take on the Scott Adams situation. Or more specifically, the chicanery that spawned it. The inciting poll question, like so many, seemed designed to produce a desired result (yes, it's possible that it was just incompetence, but attribution to evil seems more likely these days).

The problem lies in the statement itself's multiple valid interpretations. One of these, as you quite correctly note, is that the respondents thought the question was about whites. In other words, was it "okay" for *whites* to be white. In that formulation, it is indeed an expression of ugly, and perhaps even genocidal hatred. I know from experience that this form of black hatred of whites exists, and that it's more common than the reverse in the current era.

But there is another interpretation of "It's okay to be white" that is very commonplace, and which (bizarrely) I haven't seen anyone mention. In this interpretation, the question is whether it's okay for yourself (i.e. the black respondent) or other (black) people to "be white." As my own wife can attest to, for the question to be perceived this way by a significant fraction of black Americans isn't at all anomalous, but cuts rather to the heart of a certain (and unfortunate) socialization process that many have experienced.

In fact, even I can attest to it. I well recall the black-on-black accusations of someone "acting white" from my youth. In a sense, it was the *ultimate* insult, because it meant you were a phony, a fake. It meant that you lacked authenticity, even if your behavior was authentically a part of your particular upbringing. This was particularly the case in patterns of speech; if you didn't adopt the mannerisms and informal patois (ironically, inherited from Southern whites), you were trying to set yourself above other black people. Make of that what you will, but these were *very* strong currents to stand against.

That's not to say I didn't see some stand against them. But an unfortunate side-effect was innvoluntary segregation (if not total disownment) from other black youths. You would have white friends, because they were the only ones who wouldn't look down on you for the way you (quite naturally) presented yourself. For young people in general, that kind of limit coupled with ostracization is going to be very difficult to accept. Thus, you're going to get a significant number of scarred black adults who internalize the hard lesson that "it's not okay to be white." Meaning themselves, and perhaps their own children.

How significant? Unknown, because the question was so "poorly designed." But I think we can safely assume that the 48% figure is too high, and may be off by as much as half in my opinion. Although I'm guessing most of that reduction would come from the "somewhat agree" faction. Those who "strongly agree" are likely the sort of hypnotized racists who did the scarring in the first place.

Expand full comment
author

That's a really interesting nuance I haven't heard anyone else draw attention to, and it rings very true - I've heard of black people accusing one another of 'acting white' for using proper English grammar or studying, for example, and it's quite possible that some of the respondents interpreted the question in exactly that fashion. That hadn't occurred to me.

It doesn't really change the nature of the hornet's nest Adams kicked. That has quite a bit more to do with the social pathologies of white people than it really does with blacks.

Expand full comment

" I've heard of black people accusing one another of 'acting white' for using proper English grammar or studying..."

Hell, even *I* experienced something like that growing up. The perils of American public schooling, I guess. And that was mainly just for getting good grades, asking questions, etc. If I was also black, I might've been punched on a daily basis (if not worse).

Expand full comment
author

Yep. Even in Canada, there was an element of that - if you study, if you're a 'nerd', that is presumptively low status and uncool. I was shocked when I found out that continental Europeans, particularly in Slavic cultures, have precisely the opposite view.

Expand full comment
founding

From my (non-North American) perspective, the proletarianisation of contemporary US culture and the deprioritisation of whites in general appears like a forced socio-cultural convergence with the black underclass. The popularity of rap music and the normalisation of once black-behaviours amongst whites (like expressive and inappropriate displays of triumph in sporting matches like touch down dances) suggest that this is indeed a thing. The spread of aggressive anti-intellectualism is a part of this...it serves to create a helot-like class of people unfit for the formation of skill and intellect.

Expand full comment
Mar 5, 2023Liked by John Carter

Said proletarianisation has produced “people” that pride themselves on obedience, rely overmuch on crude toilet humour, question nothing and can’t speak properly. It’s utterly revolting.

Expand full comment
founding

The dumbing down of US popular culture by the infotainment and education industries is extraordinary. The shipmates of Herman Melville read Shakespeare for pleasure, while today Ivy League students struggle with the vocabulary and grammar of the 19th c. This is a catastrophic development on many levels. It will constrain future generations in any number of ways.

Expand full comment

Paul Graham has an interesting essay about the inverse correlation between being a nerd and being popular in school: http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html

It brought back some memories of the weird social dynamics and the fakeness of certain aspects of junior high and high school culture.

Expand full comment
founding

Whiteness is a very American thing. Europeans belong (and are defined) by membership in any number of competing nations, tribes, sects that have complex relationships with each other and to the pale nations and tribes of Northern Africa (the Berbers) and Western and Northern Asia. It is a crude concept unless discussing affirmative action and Civil Rights law.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment
founding

Am in agreement....up to a point. I suspect that any serious ethnonationalist project in North America (outside of Quebec) may take several generations to develop to the point where it becomes feasible. At the moment the old civic nationalism is utterly defunct, but classical nationalism of the European kind is not likely to fit the experience of ordinary whites and the radical ethnonationalisms of some dissidents will never get the support from within the elites that is required for success. It is early days. Things are developing quickly.

Expand full comment

Ethnonationalism is better than ethnic self-hatred, but much worse than a civic nationalism based on healthy values. Unfortunately, the only values being actively promoted by the regime are terribly unhealthy, so the American regime may push people towards ethnonationalism by default. It didn't have to be that way, but that's what decades of cultural corrosion from top-down Marxcissist critical theory have done. There's nothing to bring people together besides hating a perceived common enemy, which in this case are non-elite whites and Russia.

Expand full comment
author

I rather dislike the term 'civic nationalism', as it strikes me as an oxymoron, for the same reason that ethnonationalism is rather redundant. It is perfectly fine to have a polity based on something other than blood, and history is full of these, many very successful. But the common feeling that unites such a state is not in any sense 'nationalist', because it has nothing whatsoever to do with birth.

Civic patriotism would be a more accurate term.

In the North American context, all 3 of the countries are multi-ethnic imperial projects. Nationalism in the true sense of the term would require those states to break apart into much smaller fragments. Which may happen of course but it's best to be honest about the probable consequences of the resulting reduction in power, particularly for the USA.

Expand full comment
Mar 3, 2023Liked by John Carter

Southern dissidents argue that the US is an empire made up of the south, midwest and the yankee northern ruling states. The new rome

Expand full comment
founding

Does this mean that an Africanised white population (which in America would mean one whose socio-cultural norms are indistinguishable from the mass of North American blacks) would face less friction from the African-American population as a whole? That the price of racial peace is a substantial degree of cultural convergence?

This may be what helotry will ultimately achieve. Whites who "act white" will become seen as uniquely obnoxious, the equivalent of blacks who are provocatively "ghetto".

Expand full comment

Great point. I hadn't even thought about that interpretation, which would change the meaning of the question considerably.

Expand full comment

This totemization goes WAY back. I saw it in college 40 years ago. Those of use who went to mixed race high schools were much more conservative than those who grew up in wealthy suburbs.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Author

Well, you could go all the way back to the noble savage, or even the Hellenistic valourization of the Scythians, if you were so inclined. But that would be a reach, really - there's a difference between recognizing the virtues of another people, and pre-emptively throwing yourself at their feet.

What I've observed is that whites who grow up around blacks tend to be much more realistic about them, and at the same time, have a much easier time actually interacting and getting along with them. Regular contact means you have to see people for who they are, good and bad. You have to be realistic. Projecting an image of 'pure oppressed victim child' is really a luxury that only wealthy whites from the suburbs can afford, as you note.

Expand full comment

What really torques me off about these Mansonites living in whitopias is that I'm doing the Martin Luther King thingy. I live in a mixed race neighborhood in a small southern town, where people get along with each other quite nicely. I get far more yard space and floor space per dollar, and I don't have to deal with all the nitpicking Lawn Police regulations of an all white community.

But this continual race baiting by the Democrat leadership is starting to make me regret this decision. And I'm mad as hell.

And I'm someone who sympathized with Colin Kaepernick's initial protest. We do have an excessive incarceration problem. And what more appropriate time to protest when the music is saying "Land of the Free"?

But indulging in identity politics is the wrong way to fix the problem.

Expand full comment
author

Penitentiaries are legit the absolute worst way to punish criminal behavior. If course the whitelib answer is to just let everyone out, which is also not an answer. The answer is corporal punishment and constitutional carry imo.

Expand full comment

And temporary forced labor -- WITH PAYMENT. A criminal record stains the resume. Ex prisoners need money to get on their feet and job experience to improve their resumes.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Most. The rest need to be breaking rocks. No need for yards or weight rooms.

Expand full comment
author

I think in a lot of cases, corporal punishment is probably more merciful. A few moments of memorable pain after which you're welcomed back into society, instead of several years of your life.

Expand full comment
author

Yep. That would absolutely be appropriate in the case of eg theft.

Expand full comment

Re: "I'm someone who sympathized with Colin Kaepernick's initial protest. We do have an excessive incarceration problem". In my map, the difference in the incarceration rate is likely less excessive than the difference in (property and violent) crime rate.

Wasn't Kaepernick raised by a White Liberal Swedish-American parents and given every opportunity, and still turned out anti-white?

Expand full comment
author

Did he turn out anti-white despite being raised by liberal Swedes, or because of it? ;)

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 3, 2023Liked by John Carter

Good question!

I suggest he turned out antiwhite because he and his parents were enculturated in a poison stew of antiwhitism cooked up by antiwhites actively seeking to inflict harm on White people. Actively installing Meme Pathogens into everyone they could via control of media, academe and now even law.

So yes, his parents Meme Pathogens were part of why Colin turned out antiwhite. So were the Meme Pathogens he absorbed via poisoned culture of the San Francisco Bay area where they raised him.

According to Jason Köhne in Go Free, "entertainment" is a primary way Meme Pathogens are installed.

ref: https://finalblossom.substack.com/p/is-jason-kohnes-go-free-the-most

Expand full comment

This is a huge subject, worthy of multiple posts. But I'll bullet point some highlights:

* When the family-destroying welfare state was created, it hit Black families harder because in those days there truly was such a thing as White Privilege. (Whites are catching up, alas.)

* The War on Drugs turned poor neighborhoods into war zones. And there is some evidence of

bias in drug cases. Street dealers get a rougher time than dealers on preppy college campuses.

* Effective law enforcement requires respect for the law as much as fear of law enforcement. Prior to the 60s, Blacks had damn good reasons to have less respect for the legal system. [And the Woke are perpetuating that lack of respect well beyond its expiration date.]

* Where all these factors are the worst, dysfunctional honor cultures have arisen. This explains much of the murder rate differential.

* All of the above contribute to higher Black incarceration rates. And as John as mentioned, prisons do a terrible job of reforming criminals. We thus get a vicious cycle.

Expand full comment

Good points. These factors are no doubt a play. And there are other factors that are likely at play, such as the possibility that impulse control is heritable, and the poor impulse control was more dramatically selected out (against) in the people of North West Europe through their evolutionary history. Besides whatever the cold winters did, we know that English are said to have executed in excess of 1% of their males every year for hundreds of years...

Expand full comment
author

I would posit that it's precisely the interaction of a dysfunctional legal and law enforcement system, a rapacious, predatory economy, and a parasitic state feeding people's worst impulses, with immutable biological factors, that has resulted in the hot mess of cultural pathology that has afflicted the black population.

Expand full comment

When dealing with the northern vs. tropical genes thing, it is worth looking back to the Arthurian legends. The knights the "Le Morte D'Arthur" were more stupidly violent than today's street gangs.

But, according to Mallory, they had one bit of ethics: some sense of fair play. A drive by shooting would have been the height of dishonor.

If the measures listed above do not suffice, then the next solution is to legalize honorable dueling. That's how Europe originally tamed its honor society problem.

Expand full comment

Excellent! I really appreciated the whole article, although I will admit a certain shameful pleasure at seeing you quietly correct Adams' incorrect summary of the poll results :) If you hadn't, I was going to have to :D

Expand full comment
author

That was your bad influence rubbing off on me, making me all conscientious and stuff ;) But honestly I really did want to emphasize that aspect of it. The fact that a plurality of blacks don't hate whites after generations of hate propaganda is a testament to the resilience of the human soul.

That said, the fact that such a large fraction of blacks can't agree with a simple statement of OK-ness is a testament to just how broken things have become. The over-reaction of libs to a public noticing of that is probably partly related by their repressed awareness that this state of affairs is entirely their fault, and their reluctance to have that pointed out. Of course they can't admit that, so they scream 'racist!' and try to hide behind minorities. Which is their usual MO.

Expand full comment

Indeed, and that simple fact that most people are fine with people of other races is I think key to moving forward. For all the divisiveness and mutual hatred that the race-war mongers try to spread, most people are still good. That only ~26% think it is not ok to be white is sad, but still, only 26% despite immense efforts to the contrary.

Of course, they only asked 1000 people total, so it probably isn't terribly representative, but still, a sign of hope!

Expand full comment
author

N=1000 is a reasonable sample size, but I agree there are probably large margins of error. Which by its nature could go either way....

Still, that's one of the points I was trying to get at here. The crazy people have dominated discourse via volume for entirely too long. And not only on this topic.

Expand full comment

Eh, considering how unevenly distributed and... lumpy... America is, I am really skeptical of how much representation you can get from 1000 people. Once you break it down into race, sort of place where you live (how many surveys are careful to get people from outside major cities?), income, state where you live, etc., that's getting pretty tricky. Normal statistical sampling assumes a relatively uniform population distribution, but that is far from the case in practice.

But yea, a few crazy people are really driving most of the discourse. I suspect they are rather heavily over represented in education and government, making it worse.

Expand full comment

Actually, as an experienced surveyor, it comes down to identifying demographic corridors and then random interviewing door-to-door, any other method incorporating automatic error margins. Despite challenges by sociologists, I have proved that this kind of sample produces results with less than 1% error margin for a count of 100 interviews, compared to interviews with 1000 participants. This says everything about cost effectiveness of gauging public opinion as opposed to the guestimates so beloved of the media and politicians.

Expand full comment

Do you have a link to the proof handy? That would be a very impressive accomplishment.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for that clarification, Tony.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Exactly. We need to remember who is actually behind the hate polemics against whites, and it's mostly white bullies who use minority groups as the chip they place on their shoulder. As soon as anyone stands up to the bullies, the bullies pretend they are hatefully attacking the chip.

Expand full comment
author

Bingo. "That's racist, you hate minorites!" No, white liberal, we hate you.

Expand full comment

Whites are the minority, at ~8% of World population and falling.

Expand full comment
Expand full comment
author

Extoposting crosses a line.

Expand full comment

Not everyone with fair complexion identifies as White. I've read that many "fellow whites" identify as white when they find it to their advantage, while claiming "I'm not white, I'm [redacted]" when that serves their antiwhite purpose.

So there's that.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

The most hateful, arrogant ranter I had the displeasure of listening to at a recent graduate student retreat was a Black (diversity?) recruit, who explained to us that he could pass as white. I was tempted to point out to him that, so far as I could tell, he could pass as a Dutchman.

Expand full comment

Ha ha!

My family considered ourselves Dutch-Belgian... Hmmm...

Expand full comment

Fantastic essay! I love the running gag of "White -- sorry 'white'" juxtaposed with "black -- sorry 'Black'" ripping on the new Marxcissist grammar. Little stuff like that, of which there are dozens of similar examples, weirdly popping up all over the culture all at once, that make you see, this is not just some organic, bottom-up cultural development; this is intentional and designed, not to help black people, but to demonize and psyop non-elite white people.

Everything in this clown world is 180 degrees opposite the reality. Whites are supposedly privileged, yet blacks are the ones actively preferred by every major cultural institution while whites are actively and openly discriminated against. (All of us are equal, but equity demands that some of us be less equal than others.) Whites are taught not to take pride in all the great things that white people have invented and developed, but to take moral responsibility for all the worst sins of the worst white people throughout history (even if history has to be rewritten to highlight their sinfulness); whereas blacks are given a pass for all the bad shit black people do and have done as a group, but are told to take pride in every good thing a black person has ever done (even if some portions of history have to be rewritten to allow them to take credit). Seemed like race relations were going much better in America before we elected Obama, who had campaigned on a platform that he would unite Americans across racial and cultural lines. Yeah, that worked out real well.

On a different note, I wonder why the Left replaced Occupy Wall Street with BLM and anti[white]racist identity politics? Wonder why the biggest Wall Street hedge fund managers are all on board with ESG and DEI and all that? Wonder why the culture's biggest and most powerful institutions are lavishly paying and incessantly promoting the anti[[white]racism of Ibram Kendi? And why are the whites who support critical race theory (totally not being taught, and it's awesome that schoolkids are being taught about it) disproportionately upper class, while the whites who are discriminated against and demonized (for "equity") are disproportionately middle and lower class? And I wonder how the black people who fall for all this identity politics are stupid enough to believe that the elite whites are their friends in their struggle against all the oppression they face from those racist non-elite white Trump voters living in flyover country? Yeah, Bubba living in his double-wide trailer and driving a 20-year-old pickup truck with a MAGA bumper sticker is totally the one oppressing you with his cowboy boot on your neck, especially since Bubba controls precisely zero of America's cultural and financial institutions.

Expand full comment
author

Well said, and very on point.

I'm glad you liked my little running joke. It made me chuckle.

Expand full comment

I like my white self. SorrA, not sorry...

It stands to reason, if we are going to divide society, oppressed/oppressors, then you can be one or the other, and if the oppressors willingly become oppressed, the oppressed will willing become oppressors.

Better not reject just sick ideas. Love yourself, be good and kind to people.

Expand full comment
author

Exactly.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

I have a more nuanced view of anti-white whites, as I'm Eastern European.

As it turns out, in Western Europe, there's an even better target than the founding stock's rubes when someone wants to feel superior to a group "legally": Eastern Europeans. They are barbarians, but also white, so it's fine to kick them around.

A lot of white self loathing comes from the restricted targets that one's allowed to attack. Hegemonic Liberals are not self-loathing, they, in their minds, are superior to their targets, even if those include their very own - publicly disawoved - family members.

I call this malicious pride:

https://www.magyar.blog/p/true-cosmopolitans-love-their-own

So white self-loathing is old school malicious pride combined with a very restricted target group.

Expand full comment
author

I've noticed this too, particularly in Western Europe and the UK. Discomfort with mass immigration from the global south is out of bounds for polite conversation, so it gets displaced into a rabid mistreatment of Slavs. It's quite unseemly.

Expand full comment

Some of it is merited, we're not sending our best, but it shouldn't be so exclusive.

I for one don't mind the Brits shitting on our expats, most of them are as insufferable as any neophyte who leaves the Old Country behind.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

By some twist of personal history I happen to have quite a few Hungarian friends. I find it rather amusing that all the ones who do not have a family, children and/or significant assets are staunch opponents of the current regime, while the ones who do all sound a lot more, shall we say, pragmatic?

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Plenty of family people vocally shit on the government, even if they're showered with money. Hungarians don't approve of their leaders, we're a though crowd. Any Hungarian politician seeking popularity is a fool.

What we do in the voting booth is a whole different matter.

Cherish your Hungarians, they won't throw you under the bus. Even the shitlibs!

Expand full comment
author

Indeed, but it isn't Poles running the grooming gangs, is it?

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Of course. Last time I lived in London Poles were committing the crime of dressing like 90s chavs and drinking beer in front the off licence.

Old stock Eastern Europeans are generally sex crime averse. Most sex crime by "Hungarians" are Gypsies, and the victims Gypsy girls. The customers are Westerners.

Our legendary porn industry is also an ethnic racket.

Expand full comment
author

Yep. I find it deeply offensive that we're supposed to call them 'Roma' now. How dare they appropriate that name.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

It used to be the case here with all the added PC bullshit, but we successfully did a societal firmware downgrade. Now you can call them Gypsies again, and they also own up to it, no offense taken. A much healthier state of affairs. (Both groups exercise mutual respect, but the cucking is over.)

Forcing the people to endure an unhealthy state of affairs leads to a VERY strong Far-Right, a VERY dysfunctional Gypsy society, and a minor civil war between the two at the bottom of society.

Good luck managing the Western pressure cookers, doubling down on welding the safety valves shut. I'm sure it will work out, but I'll be keeping my distance!

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Also, this is not exclusive to Hegemonic Liberals: Nigel Farage also found Eastern Europeans the most convenient lightning rod for channelling Right wing frustration.

Currents find the path of least resistance.

Expand full comment

Let them go on with the self-hate.

They will fn where it leads, too late, but they all find it.

Expand full comment
author

I can't stop them, I just don't want the rest of us being dragged down into hell along with them.

Expand full comment

I have a question for all you Gen Xers. Were things better in the 80s and 90s? Looking back at the music and other cultural artifacts of the time, I get the impression that people were much less concerned about race than they are now.

Expand full comment
author

Yes. Much better.

Expand full comment

As a Generation Joneser, I can say that things were better in the late 70s in some ways than now..

Some of the Blacks I went to school with had the chip on the shoulder thing going on, but they were by far the minority. Most were proud of who they were, and were quite frank about their differences.

And lots of them could sing better than today's top pop stars..

Today's "music product" makes disco sound delightful by comparison.

Expand full comment
deletedMar 3, 2023Liked by John Carter
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Entertainment was pretty much colorblind back then. Like Geordi and Worf were both black and I didn't think anything of it. No one did. It wasn't remarkable at all.

Expand full comment
deletedMar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

I'd quibble a bit about the timeline - I think more like 1980 to 2011, roughly - but yes that's basically right. It's not that no one noticed, but it wasn't a big thing. It was around 2011 that I started seeing the obnoxious race obsession dominate left wing discourse.

Expand full comment
founding

The Obama administration was the turning point.

Webster Griffin Tarpley brought out a biography of Obama in 2008 which predicted that if elected the senator from Illinois would sow the seeds of civil war. I have not finished the book, but WGT was extraordinarily prescient. He spilled the beans on Obama's background...the birth-certificate b.s. was clearly designed to misdirect attention and prime the electorate to dismiss any revelations about the candidate's origins.

https://www.amazon.com/Barack-H-Obama-Unauthorized-Biography/dp/0930852915

Expand full comment
deletedMar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Yeah. It's not like there were no tensions, because there absolutely were. But the general zeitgeist was, we're moving past this. In everyday interactions it just wasn't something people talked about.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Very good article. And I can't help but think that this was aimed at a particular person (I think you know who) as well as a general audience. Good job!

Expand full comment

Re the "It's OK to be white" controversy: Tarnell Brown, a black economist, explains that it's not the statement at face value that bothers many blacks, but the "white genocide" baggage it carries. Same way "Black lives matter" isn't controversial, on its own, to many whites, but rather for the perceived Marxist orientations of the namesake organization's now-wealthy founders.

Not sure I'm representing Tarnell's views correctly, but that's my take on them.

Expand full comment
author

I feel like that's implying a degree of Very Online hyper-exposure to Internet trolling campaigns that is unlikely at best in the general population.

In any case, as stated in the footnote, getting that reaction was exactly the point of the campaign, and the left fell for it immediately and then doubled down.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

This crossed my mind too: Perhaps some, or even many, of the respondents who disagreed with "it's ok to be white" didn't have the actual meaning in mind, but all the emotional baggage the propaganda has creates, i.e. they associate it with literal nazis and klansmen and the like. Hard to say of course.

Expand full comment
author

It's possible, but then there's also the possibility that one is reading one's own desires into it. "Surely they can't really think that?"

Yet many are clearly quite capable of thinking such things:

https://youtu.be/BFpUjyM0orQ

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Sure it's possible. Would be interesting to have a similar study done but with a phrasing that doesn't tap as much into the loaded atmosphere, and compare.

Expand full comment
author

I don't disagree. Mark has another very interesting critique of the survey question elsewhere in the thread.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Is it better if everything is understood as dog-whistle? Collective neurosis, here we come.

Expand full comment

Those who are aware of the "engineering" of antiwhite hatred among blacks (such as the nonwhite streaming as AxeTruth) are calling out the way blacks are being manipulated by [redacted]. I want to extract the most relevant parts from his recent streams

https://www.bitchute.com/video/AB1KLI3F7Gdg/ (13 min) and

https://www.bitchute.com/video/TPd24ACrGaqO/ (42 min)

I have trouble knowing how to best invest my limited time.

Expand full comment

AxeTruth 2 minutes clip on engineering antiwhite hatred among blacks: https://video.thesetruths.com/Ssp227s/black-people-are-manipulated/

Expand full comment

There's also the fact that buried in the question "Is it OK to be white?" is a subliminal reference to the white-power OK hand sign. This likely triggers an emotional response by a lot of black people.

Expand full comment

I'm a "victim" of self-hatred. Also most of my fellow Spanish people are victims of self-hatred.

This is very characteristic of Spanish people. Envy and self-hatred. I think this is the product of a political psyop that started around the year 1700, when the Bourbon family of France decided to take over Spanish Monarchy in a war with the Austrian Monarchy.

The French won and decided to destroy the soul and self-respect of the Spanish people.

What do you call a 300 years long psyop? A Cultural Tradition.

Sorry for that pessimistic joke.

That is how I interpret the History of Spain and why my country is in the sorry state it is at the moment. Extreme demoralization and pessimism, ugliness everywhere, injustice rampant.

Planned Chaos, John.

Victim-mentality is bad on its own. Extrapolated to the collective unconscious is worse than runaway psychosis.

I think studying anything helps resolve anxiety and hatred. I wish my compatriots would destroy their TVs and study more.

I am trying to help, you know. It is so difficult to help people addicted to fear and self-hatred. A very depressing task, like cleaning the Augean stables.

Expand full comment
author

I feel like the Spanish civil war was at one level a fight between those afflicted by the self-hatred you describe, and those resistant to the mind virus.

Expand full comment

Probably true.

AFAIK, all civil wars everywhere have an "outsider" element of emotional chaos, always fostered by foreigners and distant tyrants, like Napoleon and Stalin, just to name two cases.

When there is no opposition to chaos there is no war, only destruction.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

Did one ever stop to think what diversity may have brought to the table?

Accidents, big accidents. Like train derailments, moronic government edicts, stupid politicians, dumb media and the dreaded self loathes.

If you hire someone based on their competence, you expect competence. If you hire someone based on anything other than competence you can expect a disaster.

If you hire a moronic brother, disaster.

The problem with the self haters, is they are afraid of excellence. They are afraid of brave people. So they resort to name calling when confronted with logic.

So when someone calls me a racist, I laugh.

I currently live in a country that is mostly brown, speak Spanish and i get along, ok.

I am still white.

Expand full comment
author

That's a whole other argument, and yeah, that's exactly correct. If positions are filled on any criteria other than ability to perform the necessary functions, things start falling apart very quickly. Which is exactly what we see happening.

Expand full comment
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by John Carter

The side effect of AA is that it has made people race realists. It's quite apparent someone that has only been boosted by their skin colour, gender, or both. Perpetuating the idea that all races are created equal and it being only a matter of socioeconomic reasons holding some minority group back is straight out of Hollywood. With AA, I assume 95%+ of blacks and women programmers are useless and of course I am right. I can only imagine being the exception, the Ben Carson types, how I rather be judged based on my work instead of being treated like some 3rd world savage that needs to be tended to by some barren HR cat lady who needs to direct her maternal instincts somewhere.

Expand full comment

You can call me Mr. QuizMe, but unless you're Elizabeth Warren or some other equally politically opportunistic buffoon... Since when is anyone able to "choose" their ethnicity?

Expand full comment

First art piece is so tight

Expand full comment
author

You should check out her artstation page, she's very good.

Expand full comment

As a white person, most of whose family is black, living in a geographical region in which 90% are black, I chuckled my way through that brilliant essay. I have encountered that entire range of perceptions for most of the past half-century.

Few people appear to identify the absurdities. Skin colour denotes melanin and precious little else. Differences are actually in culture but, in the US, such differences have become imperceptible in recent decades. What we are talking about are media creations and fabrications designed to create confusion and conflict; or more significantly, prevent unity. Good ol' divide and rule tactics.

If one group should be singled out for condemnation, in my opinion, it is academics, who had the opportunity for clarity of perception but, instead, have chosen to embrace woke insanity with a feverishness that actually does not surprise me. These are truly stupid people.

As a person who has worked in transcultural projects for many decades, and in multilingual environments, I have concluded that the least racist identifiable group could loosely be described as white, and the most racist are the marginal admixtures. I have a fair idea why this is so but on this I will keep my lips zipped. My observations would only unleash more unhelpful diatribes.

Expand full comment