Shades of the Prole Rainbow

There’s a gallery over at the Business Insider showing a tent city in the woods of New Jersey where about half a dozen dozen people eek by in a prolish shantytown.

What’s most interesting about the town is the different level of effort and ingenuity each inhabitant puts into his/her respective dwelling.  Although all these people are financially destitute, the quality of their housing still ranges from spartan, to pigpen, to cozy, to outright practical.   What it shows is that even in a prole rainbow, there are still varying shades of intelligence, ingenuity and personality that bring different qualities of life to the surface for all to see.

Chomsky, Rocker Part Ways

In an August 15th interview with Luis Fernando Cardenas of Guernica, entitled, “Drug Cartels and the Growing Border War,” Chomsky somersaults off his rocker when responding to this question:

Guernica: Do you think it’s wrong for a sovereign country like the United States to make every reasonable effort to stop and deport illegal immigrants from entering the country?

Noam Chomsky: It’s an interesting question to ask about the United States, where everyone is an illegal immigrant — everyone except the people in Indian Reservations. […]

Unfortunately, Chomsky, in his old age, forgot to include the sources backing that claim.  Unless he provides the requisite footnotes, how will I know which volume of Native American Immigration Law to begin with?

It could take years to locate the exact law given the multitude of legislation written by the Native Americans.

Blacks with Terrorist Names and the Victimhood Totem Pole

Otham Karim, a Ugandan-born Swedish citizen of 30 years claimed “that his visa application has been delayed because his name is on a list of suspected terrorists” and naturally sprang for the nearest “R” word fire alarm, saying, “This is another form of the racism I’ve experienced previously.  Now I’m not only a svartskalle [lit. blackhead], but I’m also a terrorist.”

Apparently, some Swedes had called him derogatory names somewhere in his past, so that means he’s lived life in the shadow of oppression, making this visa situation all the more distressing.  Funny, I’ve been called all sorts of nasty things by non-whites, but the tacit consensus is that I’m white, so it doesn’t really matter.

Karim continued, noting, “Everyone in my family got their visa within a week. But not me.”  As you can see, it’s clearly racism that’s the issue here, not his name. [I’m the only one bold-ing these quotes, btw.]

In an attempt to atone for the double-whammy Karim has received, the Swedish royal family and ruling political coalition are considering christening him St. Karim Luther King von Öppression, and giving themselves 100 lashes each.  Meanwhile, the ominous visage of Dr. MLK Jr. the First-est the Greatest the Only-est Sr. looks on, unimpressed.

In light of this story, it is imperative that we allocate a space near the top of the victimhood totem pole for blacks with terrorists’ names.  That brings us ever closer to finding just who sits at the top, which is looking more and more like someone who is a black, female, foreign, pygmy, handicapped, uneducated, poor, part Jewish, (gay?) single mother who has a terrorist’s name.

The search continues.

Oppression in the Animal Kingdom

If entire branches of study, entire professorships, entire life works are spent trying to understand and unravel human-on-human injustices (e.g. feminist and ethnic studies programs), then why aren’t there fields of study dedicated to reducing injustices seen elsewhere in the animal kingdom?

The closest we’ve got are efforts to aid endangered species, but there’s so much more inequality slipping through our pious hands!  Chimpanzees are much more brutal with each other than most humans.  Where are the crusaders for chimp justice, or are they all cultural relativists?  Female lions have to do much of the hunting but don’t always get to eat first.  Where are the feminist lion-mane burners?

And just think of all the social constructs (like this masculine-feminine nonsense) in need of deconstruction throughout the animal kingdom!  We’ve a mountain of work before us, comrades!

Costume-Marxists vs. Costume-Nazis

In a civilized country, no matter how uncivilized the debate between opposing factions is, the first side to throw a punch or light a fire is the biggest loser since, as noted, we’re talking civilized societies.  Exceptions may apply, but finding non-sequiturs and what ifs with a magnifying glass is too tedious for this post.  We’re talking generally, and of generally civilized societies.

Who would be more likely to start a fire or throw a punch, costume-Marxists or costume-Nazis?

Who are Antifascists?

Often hailing from the extreme left of the political spectrum, antifascists are a curious bunch.  Whereas those on the left tend to be nancy boys who eat tofu burgers and sip chai tea, the antifascists are an unusual upwelling of meathead testosterone junkies fulfilling an adrenaline (and self-importance) quota.  “The world will fall to its knees once it sees my tough, anti-racist fist-pumping.”

When one watches videos of their demonstrations, the mind tends to associate their behavior with football hooligans, (less violent) black flash mobs and, dare I say it, even the neo-Nazis they profess to detest.  Chest-beating nationalism has merely been replaced with chest-beating antifascism.  Antifascists are ardent haters of hate, eager to smash all intolerance with their tolerance mallets.

One wonders what antifascists are actually protesting against in countries like Sweden, where there is a sizable antifascist network.  Fighting the evils of boredom, perhaps?  Fighting police jingoism with flares and cool black and red flags?  Blasting the cold weather with stylish hooded sweaters and bandannas?  It all seems about as fictional as a game of Cowboys and Indians, the antifascists being the cowboys and racists the Indians, of course…  Or is it the other way around?

What’s particularly funny about antifascism is that, like in the Swedish example, minority groups that the antifascists call themselves in to protect against the cops aren’t welcomed by the minority groups but are in fact beaten and turned away.  In the following video, taken from Zngr’s extensive commenting over at the Irish Savant’s blog, the antifascists ended up holed up at a local McDonalds after being beaten up by minority group members and in need of police protection:

PROJECT: RECLAIM ROSENGÅRD!! In [response to minority youths burning down their own areas], police established [a] heavy presence in the area. Alas, left antifascist thugs oppose such fascist police oppression (after all, if “youths” want to burn the town up, it is only their right to do so as a response to the oppression of police who attempt to prevent them from burning up the area – wait, are we going in circles here) and in July invaded Herrgården to “reclaim” the area. Unfortunately, the immigrant gangs did not respect radical antifascist any more than they respect police or firemen, and proceeded to beat them up. Eventually, the police had to save the left-wing “activists” (as MSM calls them), who took shelter in, prepare to laugh, a local McDonalds restaurant.

(Skinny) Alcoholic Russians

Light drinkers, teetotalers and Mormons living in the Anglosphere will surely feel an ounce of pride when watching the following video on Russian alcoholism.  They will watch and think, “That’s why Russians are dwindling, the drunken bastards.”  They have a good argument indeed.

But what the righteously alcohol-free will likely overlook is Russians’ relative thinness despite their bad drinking habits.  The pious will scourge alcoholism out one side of the mouth, whilst stuffing the other side with three-too-many slices of pizza and sitting in front of either the TV or computer for 10 hours straight.

What Russians do to their livers, the overweight do to their hearts.

How Civilized is the U.S.?

Patron saints of the extreme left along with their pope, Noam Chomsky, see the social changes wrought after the civil rights era, the 1965 Immigration Act and more recent social and moral free-for-alls like multiculturalism, diversity-worship, cultural relativism, everything’s a social construct cop-outs, the feminist movement, politically correct self-censoring, the LGBT patchwork and white guilt inquisitions as signs that American society is becoming more civilized, his definition of “civilized” withstanding, of course.

“This month, March 2002, happens to be the fortieth anniversary of the public announcement by the Kennedy administration that they were sending U.S. pilots to bomb South Vietnam, that’s U.S. bombing of South Vietnam. It was the initiation of chemical warfare to destroy food crops, driving huge numbers of people into concentration camps. Nobody was there except the U.S. and the South Vietnamese. And it was a U.S. war against South Vietnam, publicly announced. Not a peep of protest. You know, the war went on for years before a protest developed. But by the time it did, not just the antiwar movement, the Civil Rights movement, and other rising movements changed the popular consciousness. The country just became a lot more civilized. No American president could possibly dream of doing that today.”

According to Chomsky, it was the America of yore (say, the 50s and 60s) that rushed into war after war with muted civilian objection, allowed for discrimination of people based on race or ethnicity, and violated international and human rights laws, particularly in Latin America.  But much less so in today’s America, says Noam!

After all, these days, we’re only embroiled in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Yemen.  That’s progressive.  And in terms of discrimination, these days we only discriminate against Americans of European extraction in application processes—now that’s civilized behavior cubed!

But Noam, with his superior gaze over all things civilized, noticed one area where the U.S. of yore was superior to that of today, namely in the area of upholding international and human rights laws.  You see, by violating Pakistan’s national sovereignty and bin Laden’s right to a fair trial, the U.S. has thrust itself back into the stone age as far as civilization goes.  The narrative Noam subscribes to (which involves Nazis!  Hooza!!) is that American leaders of decades past would have at least taken the guy alive and given him a fair trial.  Doing otherwise would have been accepted harshly by the American public:

“It was not always thus. When the time came to consider the fate of men much more steeped in wickedness than Osama bin Laden — namely the Nazi leadership — the British government wanted them hanged within six hours of capture. President Truman demurred, citing the conclusion of Justice Robert Jackson that summary execution ‘would not sit easily on the American conscience or be remembered by our children with pride…the only course is to determine the innocence or guilt of the accused after a hearing as dispassionate as the times will permit and upon a record that will leave our reasons and motives clear’.”

It’s easy to agree with this perspective, but that’s not the point here—the point is that while one side of Noam’s mouth mutters how uncivilized leave-it-to-beaver America was, the other mutters how civilized it was.  What’s a devout disciple to do when two heads appear and give opposing commandments?  Followers who once knew that they could consistently rely on Noam to break the balls of leave-it-to-beaver America are now facing deep inner turmoil at this slight praise of beaver’s America.

Could it be that Noam sometimes flips the script when he needs it to fit his narrative?

Diversity is Their Strength’s Weakness

On Hipster Homogeneity:

Hipsters, SWPLs and Yuppies are about as white as Minnesotans, with only a few Oreos, Twinkies and Coconuts tastefully included along the margins.  The proportion’s about 90/10—just enough to show how tolerant they are without letting the margin of tolerance grow enough to scare them off.  These people smear a healthy amount of diversity dung on the surface to make them look downtroddenly-cool.  The best dung comes in the form of tattoos, Sarah Palin’s black-framed glasses, matted, overgrown hair, vintage T-shirts, dangling cigarettes, piercings, cheap beer in hand, DJ headphones slung around the neck, 5 o’ clock gruff along the chin, and a vacant, brain-dead look in the eyes.

A hipster is truly hip if, when stood next to you, he/she looks more oppressed and victimized than you.  It’s cool to be a victim these days, since, according to the multiculture, one lacks an identity if one is not oppressed.  And who wants to lack an identity as defined by the multiculture?

The hipstream, like most other predominantly white phenomena from the left, isn’t genuine in its store-bought genuflection to lower-class culture.  It’s all a show to get diversity points without actually having to suffer the realities of severe heterogeneity.  These people know where their bread is truly buttered—that diversity is actually their strength’s weakness.

Finders Keepers, Founders Weepers

Dear Comrades (and fellow Stanford University faculty members),

The left’s cherished mantra, “Whites Bad, Made the World Sad” is under threat and needs reframing in order to ensure that whites more fully adhere to the new one-drop rule: one drop of guilt.

Rest assured, there haven’t actually been any outright attacks on our mantra and one-drop rule; there aren’t even any victims to be found (yet); neither can any blacklist yet be fabricated contrived doctored forged made public.  Instead, our own scholars, who work indefatigably to find weak points in our collective narrative (few as those points are), have found some areas where we must devote our best efforts to patching up the monolith.

At this point in leftist human development, three things have been found to be undisputable: the sky is blue, the sun rises in the east, and finders keepers, founders weepers.

Of course, it’s the third of these three cherished truths that we find at risk and will consequently devote the rest of this evening of consciousness ascertaining.  When we want to crush Western Civilization, we often do so by strongly denouncing the history of European exploration and emigration to other parts of the world, which brought with them their diseases, political and economic systems, and invisible racist paradigms.  But there’s trouble in paradise: What if there were no finders in the places where Europeans touched down?

Remember that our ability to issue guilt rations to Europeans and their descendants rests upon the notion that there were native populations in the lands European peoples occupy outside Europe today.  The Falkland Islands are a vexing example of a place where no known inhabitants existed prior to European landings.  Bermuda, too.  There are more such examples, but I cringe at the notion of writing them here, for our enemies patrol records such as these in search of fodder for their cannons of hate.  In short, Comrades, how can we best apportion the necessary guilt rations to European peoples in these no-man’s lands if no native population can play the part of victim?

The answer is brilliantly simple, Comrades: By expanding finders keepers to entire hemispheres.

Here’s how it works:

Since the Falkland Islands and Bermuda weren’t inhabited by humans prior to European colonization, we can’t easily assign guilt to whites living in those and other similar locations around the world.   Therefore, we need to find a way to convey ownership of the entire western hemisphere to Native Americans, even parts they never explored and settled in that hemisphere.  Therefore, if we expand the idea of finders keepers to entire hemispheres (in this case, the western hemisphere), European peoples in previously uninhabited places like the Falklands and Bermuda can now receive their fair share of guilt rations.

*pause for prolonged applause, execute first person to stop clapping on site*

But things get even better, Comrades.  While hatestorming brainstorming this defensive strategy, scholars from the White Guilt Distribution Studies department stumbled upon the holy grail of dispossessing, anti-European final solutions.  They discovered that by expanding the finders keepers doctrine to entire hemispheres, we can also dispossess European peoples not only living around the world in formerly empty lands, but also in their own ancestral land—Europe.

Since Africa stretches across both the northern and southern hemispheres, and Africans inhabited both hemispheres before Europeans, Europe is a de facto African discovery, and we all know finders are keepers.  But there’s no need to take things any further; the entire northern and southern hemispheres don’t necessarily need to be considered African discoveries, only Europe.  We’re not thieves; it’s not like we’re seeking to dispossess non-European peoples of rights to their lands.

As always, dearest Comrades, I will end this heartening speech with our institution’s Swahili motto:

“Ek oob ‘o la boo boo, fugu yoobeni dewu, koo nini.”

(From a past shrouded in light, we close our eyes and march forward into the night.)

Norman Krotchenstein

Ph. D. (Stanford, 1984) White Guilt Distribution Studies

Associate Vice Chancellor of College of European History