Liberal Champions for White Supremacy

CollegeliberalYou would think a progressive group of egalitarians obsessed with the religion of psychology would recognize the damage their own narrative does to their cause, but the anticipation of intelligence from a secular humanist is always an assumption proven wrong. Nor do we find the ranks of anti-racists and Bleeding Heart Liberals to be the only dwelling places where the official party line is sorely contradicted by the blatant subtext.

In regards to minorities, liberals are fond of encouraging racial pride, a religious like dogma of pure “equality” among all men and women, and an environment designed to herald the achievements of every race and culture. Well, except for one race, that is. The Race That Dare Not Speak Its Name is not actively encouraged to celebrate its achievements and historical legacy, for much the same reasons that speaking the name of Satan was shunned by past generations for fear of drawing his attention. While the “African Americans” have an entire month devoted to their history, those of Caucasian descent are encouraged to jealously chastise their own kin for the slightest hint of “white supremacy,” much as men are made to self-punish their brothers for the sin of sexism. While at first glance a person of crude understandings might consider this to be a simple double-standard, or perhaps even the justice that whites (or shall we say, white males) deserve, a subtle mind can discern there is a deeper reality here that even the most zealous anti-racist has not considered.

Firstly, by encouraging minorities to celebrate their achievements and making it an occasion of special noteworthiness when a black, latino, or woman first holds attains a certain political office, the liberal agenda is telegraphing a very clear message any school child can understand: “Oh you brave little runt, you were able to overcome your severe handicap and rise above the meanness of your circumstances!” Essentially by taking special notice every time a woman gets a job in a certain field or a black man ties his shoelaces correctly, liberals have managed to make the population feel the same exact way about minorities that they do about Special Olympics contestants. Clearly some sets of people need encouragement and recognition every single time they do something right, and another group of people are just naturally going to always succeed and dominate no matter how much public opposition you throw their way. That in fact, is the second tier of the liberal’s hidden subtext: Some folks are HANDICAPPED, and need a little extra help. As one would expect, by singling out the scrawniest runt in the classroom and drawing unnecessary attention to his most meager accomplishments, the liberal agenda has instilled a massive level of resentment in entire segments of the black population. Far from endearing a sense of pride and equality in those mistreated by past generations, instead a profound sense of inequality, contempt, and bitterness has taken its place. Every Martin Luther King Day, a condescending liberal should just say outright: “Look at you darkies, still living on the margins of proper society after all these years. How come you can’t be like your older white brothers, we scorn them relentlessly and make them hate themselves, but they’re still succeeding at everything they do.”

In fact, the reason that abject racial pride is encouraged among blacks and other minorities is precisely because it poses NO THREAT to anyone. After all, they’re just harmless 2nd rate citizens, still worth 3/5ths of a white person after all this time, and can play childish Black Panther games all they want. On the other hand, racial unity among whites is something deserving of pants wetting unholy terror, since everyone on this planet remembers NAZIS. Liberals know that the minorities encouraged to take pride in their race simply don’t have strong enough constitutions to become militant, organized supremacists, since by their own unconscious assessment, most of them are too busy buying chrome wheels and lusting after white female buttocks to get their shit together long enough to even pay the rent on time. As another author has noted, even among libertarians, their implicit racism is obvious anytime they talk about how the minimum wage hurts blacks most, begging the rather obvious question of why black labor cannot command the same pay rate as white labor. Even among the most egalitarian of freedom lovers, the plain assumption is, blacks are on the bottom of the pile. One would be tempted at this point to shake their head at the unconscious damage white “advocates for minorities” are doing here, but blacks themselves are still flocking to the role of house nigger by participating in the silliness of organizations like the NAACP. Only a handful of public black figures are aware enough of the setbacks done by unconscious liberal racism to demand that blacks stand on their own merits.


The final, most hilariously selfdamning plank of the liberal subtext goes like this: “Whites are the dominant race, their accomplishments are simply expected of them, and to temper white hegemony, we must convince whites themselves to do it, because no one else could ever hope to stand in open defiance of them.” Liberals know that minorities could never mount their own version of a socialist revolution. The only avenue left to them is to work on the psychology of whites themselves, and simply get the biggest bullies on the playground to treat the runts nicer. By now everyone understands just how dangerous organized white people are. One might even call them the most deadly force on this entire planet, given the history of white conquests, the millions of dead Jews, and the eager usage of atomic weapons by white Americans. In fact, the very proliferation of white countries over the world speaks to the white appetite for conquest and savagery to anything unable to compete with them. By getting whites to pass laws designed to curb their own excess and cruelty, essentially the liberal egalitarians are acknowledging the supremacy of whites and that they further understand that white hegemons will agree to minor concessions if they don’t sense a true threat to their power. The only option left to them is persuasion, and should the day ever arise when whites truly felt threatened by a nationalistic minority group, they might just remember the Old White Way and completely obliterate the threat in an orgy of violent savagery as they are so fond of doing when challenged. This is why the hyperbolic portrayals of white supremacists that a campaign of “white genocide” is being conducted through subterfuge and interbreeding will never be taken seriously, even if there were truth to them: Whites still see themselves as being unquestionably dominant, and everyone else agrees with them.

The liberals also like to play a more dangerous game by implying that a “culture of white oppression” is the cause of inequality in our society. Naturally many have called their bluff on this and asked if it really is white supremacy that keeps darkie down, or rather widespread black incompetence. Many also recognize the narrative of white oppression further begs the question of how these damn whites got to be in charge in the first place, leading to increasingly more creative attempts by people like Jared Diamond to postulate white hegemony is solely the result of accidental environmental factors. In both cases you will see concerted attempts to explain away white dominance as being the result of anything BUT something common to whites themselves. When one observes a fairly equal competition and notices one group winning constantly, it is logical to assume the winners have a superior strategy, skill or dedication, not that Fortune simply smiles on them every time. (One could only assume liberals think auto-racing is settled purely by who has the fastest car.) Furthermore, if we accept the egalitarian view that all men are more or less equal in terms of individual ability, we would naturally want to know what “tricks” the whites have discovered that keep them on top. Ironically though, the very things that would truly enable minorities to quickly climb the socio-economic ladder are kept from them, as the idea of studying “White Tools for Success” is the gravest imaginable heresy for social studies. Ironic that the liberal fear of praising whites for anything has both kept the minorities down and actually cemented white hegemony by keeping white tricks in the bag and out of sight. If liberals were not so dogmatically obsessed with forcing the evidence to conform to their party line, these flat Earthers might just discover there isn’t anything intrinsically superior about whites themselves, but there is something intrinsically superior about certain beliefs, memes, cultures, or strategies held mostly by whites.

The secret to changing the outcomes in this game is studying the winners in detail, not encouraging the losers to try harder and the winners to back off.

  • David

    I get your point, but how’s it going to be a century from now? I mean, just look at what the Mongols did in the 13th century. I could see Whites getting rolled on. Especially since those liberals are in power trying (and succeeding) to make decadence the norm.

    • Michael Enoch

      I don’t think that decedence alone can destroy Western civilization. Throughout history there has been a balance maintained between decadence and traditional values in Western culture. Famous decadents like the Marquis de Sade have become celebrated figures. So decadence itself is a part of our culture. In fact moreso for us than for the savages of the third world that usually have much more puritanical value systems (see the Taliban).

      Whites will remain on top in any country that has been historically white. What is likely to happen is that the historically white countries will become minority white, and see a corresponding fall in mean income and living standards. So there will be a white elite overseeing essetially a population of svages rather than a majority white country that is largely affluent and middle class with a small poor class and small super rich class. Like the US of the 1950s.

      This may be inevitable no matter what given global demographics combined with liberal self hating ideology. The birth rate of poor non whites globally vastly outpaces the shrinking birthrate amongs wealthy whites in Europe and the US.

      • Sun

        Don’t agree.

        In new societies there is a strong will to strive for glory, passion, or even stability. Ancestors build something meaningful and and overtime the future descendants take the society for granted and live hedonistic lifestyles until it is not sustainable anymore.

        Part of it is a natural cycle.

        It is hard to know what a hard life is when everything is given to you. It is also understandable as it hard to not to want to shelter you kids from harshness that you faced, and provide in, in a sense, a “better” life then you. When your ancestors fight bloody battles to establish themselves and securing safety lifestyles for future generations, that gets lost in sands of time itself, only remembered in pages of history books. When your ancestors worked hard jobs and saved everything–or risked everything to travel for a foreign land, it gets lost as society eases into modernity, and circumstances change.

        There is no intrinsic connection to the past emotionally, because we were born of a different era, unable to peer into the past itself, only to hear distant echos.

        However, it can be sped up by certain ideas/movements/etc. In all honesty, I’m surprised that this has lasted as long as it did.

        Europeans are not impervious to this, as we can clearly see in the West. However Europeans have the ability shown in the past to become masters of their own destiny.

        All things eventually become ash and all civilizations eventually fall. News ones rise from those who affirm themselves. It is a continuous cycle.

        • Sun

          All of this ties into the human condition. Humans desire safety and comfort. Some humans do, outside of immediate coercion seek danger and discomfort–to struggle. But those are few in number. Most will only do what is least required and not more, unless directly threatened into action.

          All ideological aspects dwell in our very being. Some stronger then others. Some come out different times under different environmental circumstances. Understanding how each relate to the human condition is very important.

  • David

    Enoch, but what if the Libs try to turn a Rhodesia or a South Africa on their own countries? We already have a “Black” president. There are people questioning if a White can ever be President again. Whether that’s true or not is debatable, but if enough people believe it the parties will nominate non-Whites. Hillary v. Rubio. Then somewhere down the line the self-hating libs cannibalize their own society. Not say we’ll ever be as bad as Zimbabwe, but I don’t take these things for granted. Their end goal is liberation after all.

    • David

      Well, non-white males at least. Feminists are okay too.

  • honeygetoverit

    Alex, this is effing BRILLIANT. I’ve been saying as much for years now, glad there is a white male alive today that has the spine to call it what it is. BRAVO!

  • Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/03/06 | Free Northerner()

  • R. Jones

    “There isn’t anything intrinsically superior about whites themselves, but there is something intrinsically superior about certain beliefs, memes, cultures, or strategies held mostly by whites.”

    Well that’s false. There is something superior, measured by certain tests I hear.

  • Rework Oh Ryan

    Maybe everyone needs to abandon collectivist views, and start seeing people as individuals, instead of lumping them in groups. No two people are the same, even if they share commonalities which cause us to group them together.

  • Moplalalallalal

    Lool at this Overweight Neckbeard!!!! Hahahah.

    Wahhhh!!! Blacks are this…

    Wahhh!!! Hispanics are that…

    Hit the Gym, fat ass. Don’t forget to open the Windows, your room smells of Farts. :D ^_^

  • Cole Younger

    I think its funny how the writers on this site seem to turn their noses up to the “mantra white genocide team” when the “mantra white genocide team” is consistently getting their memes into the mainstream media and exposing millions around the world to a consistent pro-white message and changing the terminology being used to describe what is happening. The mantra is responsible for catapulting the term “anti-white” into the mainstream and “white genocide” is right behind it. At this stage you are either pro-white or pro-white genocide and all pro-whites should be supporting each other instead of positioning themselves as the most “enlightened racists” and throwing anyone else under the bus. I guess its just a white thing to be so splintered.

    • MKUltra

      “This is why the hyperbolic portrayals of white supremacists that a campaign of “white genocide” is being conducted through subterfuge and interbreeding will never be taken seriously, even if there were truth to them: Whites still see themselves as being unquestionably dominant, and everyone else agrees with them.”

      For one thing, if Whites were in a country with only other Whites and practiced military isolationism, the current favored position among pro-Whites, there’s absolutely NO WAY Whites could practice supremacy over anyone. I think previously-95% White America and previously-100% White Europe,is as good a place as any for this. Being in a 100% White country is contradictory with the concept of “White supremacy” as anything other than a meaningless scare word. You can only practice “White Supremacy” in any meaningful sense if there are non-Whites in your country. I don’t want any non-Whites in mine, and propose to have Whites ruled by, and ruling, only other Whites. If you used leftist reasoning, you might cynically call that “White subjugation”, but in reality it amounts to the White status quo for millennia.

      My next point is that there are a few different things which constitute “genocide” according to the Human Rights Convention.

      1. Killing members of the group.
      2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to the group.
      3.Imposing on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
      4. Transferring children of one group to another.

      I believe there was one other thing, but I’ve listed the relevant parts.The killing and bodily harm is mostly done by a proxy group, the mental harm is being done by the same group behind the rest of it( sans the killing and bodily harm).The jews have psychologically abused our children for generations to the point that not only do they misunderstand our culture and traditions but actually believe and say things which are physically impossible or logically self-contradictory. They now believe that “there is a difference between hate speech and free speech” when in reality, the only speech deserving of protection is the speech which the jews would outlaw if given the opportunity. they believe that gays are “born that way” while sex (gender,in their terms) and even race are “social constructs”. They believe that the lack of evidence of their “white privilege” is valid evidence of their “white privilege”. This is just a small sample. Obviously,these things are insane, and it can be proven that these beliefs were drilled into our children through a program of psychological abuse by jews.

      It is surely well-known to those making economic and social policies that Whites tend to have few children and invest much in the way of resources into them and that Whites will not have children if they never obtain access to those resources on the male side, or if they are given access to their own resources far surpassing what average males have access to on the female side (but no mate with equivalent resources due to the fact that high-status men do not mate with women for resources) increasing what some call the “hedonic value” enjoyed by the woman. This state of affairs has been brought about deliberately. As recently as 2008,when the majority of those who lost their jobs were male, the Obama Administration sat down with NOW and reneged on his “shovel-ready jobs” in favor of increasing female employment. As much as women claim they can “do it all”, the last thing they’re going to do is marry a guy with no job,have kids with him, and then support him and the kids.Policy-makers knew this would never happen when they promoted it as the ideal model for everyone from 1970 onwards.What it would do would be to make sure that women NEVER marry men, and instead enter into an arrangement with the state directly. When women are spoken for by the state and chasing fulfillment through career,they do not have children. The White birthrate has been plummeting ever since. If this was simply one policy that was detrimental to White reproduction or it only happened one time,one could write it off, but for 50 years every policy which could possibly undermine family formation was rolled out in the guise of “women’s liberation” one after the other, with a seeming aim towards tightening the screws every single generation.

      Then there is the border which politicians always promise to hermetically seal up, yet never do. Every 10 years or so, we are greeted by another call to “open our hearts” to “just 5 milllion” or so illegals which always turns out to be twenty, 30, or 50 million.

      These calculated policies have reduced the share of U.S. population that is White from 95% to a bare majority, or possibly a bare minority, since many Arabs,Jews, and Mestizoes are counted as “White” on the U.S. Census. Part of the physical destruction of the White American, a unique ethnic blend of mostly Irish,Scottish,English,German and Scandinavian has been accomplished.

      Then there is the undeniable FACT that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that black children have a “right” to White children as part of the former’s education. This is really the smoking gun,as not even the most shit-brained libtard can deny the evidence that THIS genocidal practice is the law of the land in America and has been for decades.

      Brown vs Board is both the crime and the evidence that the United States practices genocide against White children,per the U.N. Convention on Human Rights, and the “Doll Test” that lead to this genocidal practice, if repeated today, would show the same results that were then attributed to the separate but equal educational institutions, long after White children were shoved into classrooms with black students with bayonets. When asked which doll is more beautiful, a White doll or a black doll, negroes today would still pick the White doll. This is because Whites are simply more beautiful by every aesthetic measurement than any other race, and every other race knows it instinctively. It has nothing to do with education any more than a man’s preference for thin shapely women over obese women.

      Perhaps it never will be taken seriously,perhaps everyone DOES believe that Whites are invincible,maybe people will continue to claim that genocide claims are hyperbolical and point to the received wisdom of the vanishingly small number of European Whites in positions of leadership (who are forbidden to act expressly in the interest of Whites and especially not to the exclusion of non-Whites) as the proof that we aren’t being genocided,but to paraphrase Galileo “And yet,they ARE genocided!”