why do blacks keep yelling racist and slavery???

Question

Blacks are not the only ones that been slaved, us whites too. every time i turn on tv theres a black person saying racist and slavery. if they don't get there way they do that stupid stuff like that.

There the ones who are racist's, NOT us. no wonder there's the kkk and groups like it, we are sick and tired of it..ITS IN THE PAST sheesh, call me a racist. just telling it like it is.

if no white person can stand up to them, i'll stand up and speak my mind cause it's the god's truth, if the whites *like me* and stand up and rise up to them black's..maybe just maybe us whites and them blacks can join as one.

I say get over it its in the past the past is dead..this is now.

Answer 1

Reparations should be tied to repatriation back to the Motherland. We would pay any price to be rid of them! Yet they would not go back willingly no matter the price. Even with the average ******* IQ at the retarded 69 and 80 for Jewnited States mulattos they are not so stupid as not to know they have it made here taking advantage of christ insanity inspired White foolishness and guilt.

The effects of slavery are wonderful for them (negroids & mulattos)but very destructive for Caucasoids and for the Jewnited States of America. If not for past slavery most all of them would not be here leeching from White created civilization. Rather they would be in Sub-Sahara "black" Africa in mud and dung (poop) huts with flies all about (that seem not to bother them) living their stone age existance and waiting for the next food shipment from the christ insanity infected White man.

We must remember the lives they lived and the standard of living they had in Africa. We must remember that stronger tribes enslaved weaker ones (as is the history of all peoples -human and sub-human) and most all of those slaves that were bought by rich Americans from the Jewish slave traders were already slaves under much harsher conditions than slavery here. We must remember that slaves here had it much better than even most all free negroids in the Motherland.

We can look at tribes in "black" Africa today that have had the least help and influence from the White man and see how they live. They bath in cow urine, cover themselves in cow poop, cut themselves with deep cuts all over their bodies, whip themselves bloody with branches - all as custom, and or tradition and ceromony. Here they were valuable property and thus were kept in good health and treated fairly well. They recieved better health care than back home and better housing and easier work and better and more food and recieved better education. They were rarely whipped and then only as punishment while back in Africa it is something they submit to volantarily not as punishment but per their customs, ceronmonies and traditions.

This nation was not built on slavery or cotton or defective cotton pickers. Most everything in this nation was designed, created and built by White men to include the railroads that had hundreds of thousands of White workers (mostly Keltic)but only 3,000 mongoloids that get all the attention today. The South was very backward and poor during slavery and the North was much richer and industrialized. Slavery was harmful to Southern White folk since it eliminated jobs for them and lowered their wages.

Today White folk have had most of their civil rights taken away while non-whites get special treatment. We no longer can sell our property to whom we please or serve whom we want or hire whom we want or have the freedom to associate with our own kind. Our traditional White living areas and schools and businesses and clubs have been destroyed yet non-Whites have all of those for themselves. Negroids and now metizos have destroyed every major city in the nation and most minor ones as well. Now they pollute most all areas of the nation. They have ruined our public education systems and degraded our culture.

They (negroids) rape over 30,000 White's per year and kill 1,500 of us and violently attack about 1 million of us each year. This has been going on for 47 years ever since they stopped fearing the White man and his rope. Crimes the other way around are a tiny fraction of that and rare indeed though they get all the attention. The rare White on black crime is highlighted and many books and movies are still made about crimes that are decades old while the majority (90%+) of inter racial crime that is black on White is ignored - no movies or books.

Just last month a White couple in Indiana was tortured and murdered by Blacks and racial things were written in their blood on the walls of their home. The husbands penis was cut off and put in the wifes mouth while both of them were still alive. That crime is not being charged as a hate crime and there is no national coverage and little local coverage. Remember the "Zebra" murders? Of course not since even when they occured they recieved no national attention and little local attention even though it is estimated by the police involved that a racist black cult killed as many as 300 White people, though most of the cult was never charged and those that were were only charged with under 20 murders. Most all of them have long since been let out on parole. Heads and hands of White victims were brought in by members to prove a kill. They needed to kill 30 White people to be "made" members. They had 30 "made " members. No movies about that and only one out of print book.

It is all about highlighting the rare case of White racism and ignoring the usual racism the other way around so as to fan the flames of hatred for us and encourage the "kill Whitey" attitude while creating and growing foolish White guilt. The harm that negroids have caused this nation is so great they could never repay us. Yet they talk about reparations for them when they owe us. Sure pay them reparations they do not deserve but only if they repatriate back to the motherland. Oh what a Whiter brighter world it would be without them. However as our nation darkens so does our future.

Remember that it is part of humanoid evolution that stronger superior humans dominate and even enslave inferior weaker humans or humanoids.

Remember that despite the mindless slogans the stupid masses parrot there is no such thing as racial or any other type of equality nor is there a human race. There is a human species that like all species is divided into competing sub-species. We call our sub-species races. For horses it is breeds while for most species we just say sub-species. Each sub-species has it's own general strengths and weaknesses and other traits and even individuals within a sub-species will have those traits to varying degree's. Not even identical twins are really identical or equal. It is natural and healthy and even required for survival that all sub-species practice sub-species ism (racism for humans).

Every creature is here to look out for it's own intrests ONLY, and to advance and reproduce and expand to the limits of it's capabilities in competition with other sub-species and species. The closer related sub-species are naturally our greatest enemies since we compete for the same territory and resourcers. The history of race relations proves that. Despite the propaganda we get from childhood on against racism (from the media, school and parents) our natural racial instincts can not be destroyed totally. Sure among White folk our racism is weak while the other races are very racist.

Hate is a protective emotion that springs from love and only exists in connection to love. We naturally hate those and that which is a threat to whom and what we love. Our hate is only as strong as our love. Those that do not give much of a hoot about anything or anyone (even themselves) can not muster much hate since they do not have much love. Forget all the christ insanity inspired propaganda about hate and love and try independent rational thought for a change. If you are like most all (95%+) you are a herd animal that needs to have masters and is slave minded and even bends knee's to fictional pie in the sky masters & thus you are not capable of independent rational thought.

There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater horror than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as part of the inevitable texture of American life. "Racism" is never shrugged off. For example, when a white Georgetown Law School student reported earlier this year that black students are not as qualified as white students, it set off a booming, national controversy about "racism." If the student had merely murdered someone he would have attracted far less attention and criticism.

Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full alert for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach against it, America is said to be racked with it, but just what *is* racism?

Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are rooted in race. When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal more than this. Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a clue to understanding what Americans *do* mean. A peculiarly American meaning derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are equal. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been declared to be equally talented and hard- working, and anyone who questions the dogma is thought to be not merely wrong but evil.

The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If blacks, for example, are equal to whites in every way, what accounts for their poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation for black failure is white racism. And since blacks are markedly poor, crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.

All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic. Any explanation for black failure that does not depend on white wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of racial differences. Thus, even if today's whites can find in their hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's whites must have oppressed them. If whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they must oppress them UNconsciously. If no obviously racist individuals can be identified, then *institutions* must be racist. Or, since blacks are failing so terribly in America, there simply must be millions of white people we do not know about, who are working day and night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some fashion, an indictment of white people.

The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to believe that the only explanation for non-white failure is white racism, every time a non-white is poor, commits a crime, goes on welfare, or takes drugs, white society stands accused of yet another act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-whites is standing proof that white society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For precisely so long as non-whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the same level as whites, whites will be, by definition, thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be committed almost exclusively by white people. Indeed, a black congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black mayor of Detroit, have argued that only white people *can* be racist. Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she explained that *all* whites are racist and that *only* whites can be racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality

Although some blacks and liberal whites concede that non-whites can, perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-whites have been forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of white oppression. What appears to be non-white racism is so understandable and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when done by whites is thought to be normal when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true.

Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost tedious to list them: When a white man kills a black man and uses the word "******" while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and the nation beats its collective breast; when members of the black Yahweh cult carry out ritual murders of random whites, the media are silent (see AR of March, 1991). College campuses forbid pejorative statements about non-whites as "racist," but ignore scurrilous attacks on whites.

At election time, if 60 percent of the white voters vote for a white candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for the black opponent, it is white who are accused of racial bias. There are 107 "historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically white colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of... the same thing. To resist would be racist.

"Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything that could be construed as an expression of white pride is a form of hatred. It is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect school instruction and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas for native Americans to ask them to learn English is racist.

Blatant anti-white prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is now the law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action, if practiced in favor of whites, would be attacked as despicable favoritism.

All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club or association expressly for whites is by definition racist. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights" organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but is said to be viciously racist.

At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action have set up student unions for whites, analogous to those for blacks, Hispanics, etc, and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently, when the white students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found themselves to be a minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club like the ones that non- whites have. They were turned down in horror. Indeed, in America today, any club not specifically formed to be a white enclave but whose members simply happen all to be white is branded as racist.

Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of whites (and sometimes men), and never the other way around. No one proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting whites, Hispanics, or Asians. No one ever suggests that National Hispanic University in San Jose (CA) would benefit from the diversity of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a lack of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to celebrate *homogeneity*. And yet any all-white group - a company, a town, a school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as possible. Only when whites have been reduced to a minority has "diversity" been achieved.

Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we are so often asked to do, is no different from *deploring an excess of whites.* In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess of whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that approximately 90 percent of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are non-white. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the country every year are virtually all non-white. It would be racist not to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is, of course, only white nations that are called upon to practice this kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.

What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated citizens across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor whites who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even if they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs and schooling?

Would Mexico - or any other non-white nation - tolerate this kind of cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet white Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be hopelessly racist.

There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non- whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of "hating" another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can come only at the expense of whites. They can demand preferential treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are "anti-white."

Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer the company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked and hateful.

Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, *whites* must *also* champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice their own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, white people are cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.

Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and El Salvadorans are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative action preferences over native-born whites, but can they be blamed for accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?

No, it is the white enterprise in the United States that is unnatural, unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in the history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens. Never before has a people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in history. Of all the races in America, only whites have been tricked into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow "hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their own kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no ill will towards non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.

What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."
What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for their own people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history - but only so long as the aspirations are those of whites.


The 14 Words

Rahowa
88
Might Is Right!!



http://www.amren.com/
http://www.amren.com
http://www.newnation.org/
http://tightrope.cc/rap.htm
http://www.overthrow.com/creator/wmb/credo29.asp
http://www.overthrow.com/creator/ner/ner-1-05.asp
http://www.loompanics.com
http://www.freerepublic.com/
http://www.frontpagemag.com/
http://www.natall.com/pub/2001/082501.txt
http://www.solargeneral.com
http://www.natall.com
http://www.resist.com
http://www.rahowa.com

Answer 2

Because it's easy to blame things on race and racism. Blacks aren't the only ones by the way. I've seen plenty of Jewish, Asians and Italians do pretty much the same thing.

"There the ones who are racist's, NOT us. no wonder there's the kkk and groups like it, we are sick and tired of it..ITS IN THE PAST sheesh, call me a racist. just telling it like it is."

That's a foolish statement to make. The KKK were around not long after slavery and wanted to KEEP the black man down through violence and intimidation. Your defending the KKK is sickening to me. Even if no Black person ever mentioned racism or slavery again the KKK would still hate anyone who isn't white.

Answer 3

Wow, Time for top college historic previous lesson #a million, you all people is the main uneducated bunch. at the beginning, all people could desire to recognize that the racist south use to be democratic. The progressives have been the republicans, they stood for federal potential that the southerners hated aka Lincoln. however the events flipped interior the 1930's that's no longer some conspiracy theory that's effortless expertise in center college historic previous books, it rather is between the main important activities in our American political device. it rather is noted as the "New Deal" in 1932 the democratic occasion aligned themselves with liberals, unions, and blacks. jointly as republican's did no longer align themselves against blacks they did against unions and liberal socialism. there have been numerous politicians that flipped factors, there replaced right into a large occasion shift in comparison to all ever viewed. Please do a touch study. you're a humiliation to yourselves and your united states of america.