|
|
|
Sexists, racists, and other classes of classifiers: Form and function of “...Ist” accusations  W. Barnett Pearce
In late 1989, I wrote to W. Barnett Pearce to discuss his work and how it might resolve problems that I was struggling with. Noting my struggles with accusations of ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ - and having compassion! - he sent me this article, so on target and deft in the manner which it handled my concerns, that it demonstrated unequivocally that his was a discipline that I needed to be apprised of. Indeed, this article provided two of the most important clues for my WN advocacy. The first being that ‘race’ is (in an important regard) a matter of classification - at very least being treated as such by people who mattered, particularly by our foes, but also by our people, where they know what is good and necessary for them. Secondly, as the blurb above hints at, our antagonists can always shift its paradoxical structure to their anti-White agenda: Viz., if you say, “no, I don’t discriminate based on race, sex, etc. I judge everyone on their individual merit”, then they will charge you with being disingenuous, willfully ignoring “the long history of discrimination, oppression and exploitation of these groups.” But then, on the other hand, if you take the measure of saying, “ok, lets take that into account and use, say, affirmative action to help these groups into positions in which they are under-represented”, then you are classifying and a racist by definition.
- which I found ironic, that being the exact name (same year as well) of the girlfriend of mine who drove me to psychic melt-down. Anyway, the (very helpful) gist of that article, which I’ve noted several times before, is that within the context of liberal feminism, even a well intentioned man can always be put into the wrong: You can always be treated as either a wimp or a pig, no matter what you do as a man. If you try to treat her with deference, gentleness, help and respect, then you can be looked upon as a wimp and a condescending patriarch who does not respect her strength, agency and autonomy. On the other hand, if you treat her as one of the boys, respecting her toughness and autonomy, then you can be looked upon as a pig, a male chauvinist pig, not respecting the special quality of her gender, but rather a male chauvinist pig, projecting the hegemony of your patriarchical world view over all and everyone. Comments:2
Posted by Blasey Ford's ex. on Wed, 03 Oct 2018 14:24 | # Blasey Ford’s ex-boyfriend testifies under oath to her lying. 3
Posted by Kavanaugh's contortions on Sat, 06 Oct 2018 17:30 | # Kavanauagh is emerging as drunken corporate apparatchik, anti-union, destructive to the environment at every turn, for the patriot act and Guantanamo Bay antics, against pro-choice. Good for Whites? Maybe not. ...nutty and destructive contortions that the Right must go into in order to try to negotiate racial separatism implicitly and vertically instead of horizontally and explicitly. 4
Posted by Jim Goad on Wed, 10 Oct 2018 07:56 | # Decidedly Alt-Righty, and not espousing politics to which I subscribe, but nevertheless clever, Jim Goad can be entertaining - as in this audio: 5
Posted by Rape champs overshadowed in Kavanaugh hearing on Fri, 12 Oct 2018 05:38 | # To paraphrase Jim Goad in the aforementioned “audiocast”... Among the injustices of the Kavanaugh hearings is that it put the spotlight on White male rapists, whereas black men are far and away the champions of rape - as dominant to rape as they are to basketball:
6
Posted by "Sucka-Free Zone" on Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:28 | # This is definitely not an endorsement. Especially not as Jim Goad finds “Uncle Tom’s” preferable in theory and practice to ornery N words. On the contrary, the Uncle Tom’s create a bridge to integration whereas N words encourage separatism with their more vile behavior. That’s what we want, separatism. However, again, Goad is entertaining and he and his side kick, Lorin, discuss the “Sucka-Free Zone” ..and what it takes to establish it. Speaking from experience, I’d have been a lot better off having inculcated that information. Young fellas be apprised.
Comment: While as a separatist I am diametrically opposed to the kind blacks that you like - viz., I see the Uncle Tom as the long term danger and the militant black powerists as those who’ll instigate separatism - I found your discussion of the “no sucka zone” brilliant. In regard to Lorin’s examples of instinctive, visceral reaction as a natural defense - he gave the example of revulsion to two dudes kissing - I may add the example of a visceral response, or rather non-response: I have never been jealous of a White man who’s had a black woman. - DanielS 7
Posted by Antonin Scalia on Sun, 21 Oct 2018 07:37 | #
8
Posted by Kamala Harris on Sat, 03 Nov 2018 11:06 | #
Post a comment:
Next entry: US passes law forcing president to give Israel minimum $3.8 billion a year, no matter what it does.
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA Nations
|
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 01 Oct 2018 20:23 | #
I’d like to render an opinion, or rather my initial impressions of the Brett Kavanaugh nomination as he is up against accusers, Christine Blasey Ford et. al.
My first impression is that I am not very sympathetic to Kavanaugh because I understand that he is ‘pro-life’. I say, not very sympathetic for that reason among others, perhaps (I have not investigated his positions), because it is not a very important issue to me. And even if he were to try to swing Roe v Wade the other way, I don’t think he’d succeed.
Nevertheless, I can understand why feminists would try to keep him off the bench (and White activists would want to keep him out for that matter, as it is a check on non-White population).
[As a side note, I tend to be pro-choice for the same reason I favor the death penalty: you can’t value life so idealistically as to make it unlivable.]
While Kavanaugh may be helpful on border control, there should be other candidates who are good on that issue without being intrusive on people’s capacity for agency on the crucial matter of population control. Which bears on border control and demographic management as well, even if after migration.
I’ve already said too much on that - its not my issue, not where I choose to fight. Personally, I can live in a society that doesn’t have abortion or help for AIDS patients - it is the brutes who cannot control their impulses and lack of forethought who would be impacted.
Anyway, having heard Blasey Ford…. I could be wrong about this…but even if this event occurred exactly as she describes it, I don’t know that it should have been quite so overwhelming a trauma to her that she couldn’t have worked through it by now. Not that it’s ok, and not even that she should not testify about it - even for the motive of keeping a ‘pro-life’ judge off the bench.
But just that maybe it wasn’t as bad as she made it out to be. It reminds me of the Clarence (who I didn’t like either) Thomas hearings. He may have done the things he was accused of - saying ‘there’s a pubic hair on my coke’ - but was it really so bad?
Ok, what Kavanauch is alleged to have done is worse. But still, is it so bad? Let me put myself in his position, and assume that the allegations are true as Blasey Ford describes them.
There is a lot of pressure on you. You are teenage male and you are told that as a guy that you must push the issue with girls - that they might even secretly want you to push the issue. It’s expected of you. You are drunk and emboldened as such to push the envelope.
You find yourself in a situation with a girl who is available to this social experiment. You push her onto a bed and try to take her clothes off. She starts screaming and you put your hand over her mouth - not because you want to go on to rape her, but because you don’t want other people to think that you are not going to stop, when in fact, you will.
As your drunken friend jumps onto the bed you are knocked off her and she scurries out of the room and locks herself in the bathroom.
You do not camp out and wait for her to come out. You do not pursue her to rape her when she flees the house. You ramble down the stairs laughing because you know that you were never serious and would not proceed unless she too thought it was fun.
That might not be the truth of the matter. I might be wrong. Maybe it was as bad as Blasey Ford makes it out to be.
That’s just one possible take that comes to me in first impression. And I must say, if true, Kavanaugh pushed things further than I ever would, or ever have with a woman. I would say it was wrong and I can understand how Ford would be freaked-out in the episode.
On the other hand, she was not raped. Maybe I’m wrong, but the amount of trauma and impact she expresses over this incident seems unwarranted, especially for someone of her intellectual accomplishment.
Again, I can understand why she’d testify to try to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court, but her allegations alone do not strike me as an unbearable and unintelligible experience that can’t be figured out and even understood as perhaps NOT attempted rape.
However, I must add that with other women weighing-in with allegations, and Kavanaugh seemingly not able to understand how others would not be able to see ‘playing quarters’ (a drinking game, which compels you to drink beyond measure) as an impeccably normal activity, I do think his judgment is suspect enough so that the grander point is made that well, why not just find another candidate?