Are Americans doomed?

On Twitter Will Westcott recently said:

The US right-wing is dominated by liberal conservatism, a perverse ideology that prioritizes extreme individualism and selfishness over the public good and GDP [Gross Domestic Product] as the reason for existence.

That’s why taking measures that hinder individualism or economic growth are opposed.

In order to justify this ludicrous value system, liberal conservatism engages in denialism or ridiculous conspiracy theories to explain away the pandemic.

Facing up and admitting there’s a real pandemic would mean exposing their real ideological motivations.

They can’t state what they really believe—that their personal autonomy is more important than public health and they don’t care how many get sick and die as long GDP keeps growing—because that would be deeply unpopular. Thus, they descend into denialism and conspiracy theories.

On the flip side, the US left-wing is dominated by liberal progressivism, an equally perverse ideology that believes “racism” and “white supremacy” is the real virus and more important to fight than an actual pandemic that’s infecting and killing thousands of people.

That is why the US left-wing initially opposed closing borders and isolating foreigners when the virus first appeared—that would be “racism” and “xenophobia” and then decided to form huge crowds to protest white supremacy in the middle of a pandemic.

Liberal progrssivism does not have to devolve into denialism and crackpot conspiracy theories to minimize the coronavirus because they openly state they believe fighting racism is more important than fighting a pandemic.

Liberal conservatism also agrees that racism is the greatest evil so the progressive left receives no pushback or condemnation for such an insane belief. Also, the conservatives want an excuse to deny taking public health measures and the protests give them that.

 
Based Barsoomian added:

At the same time they are doing nothing to stop blacks from destroying the city and killing people on the streets.

 
Michael Tracey commented:

The US right-wing impulse to deny the severity of the coronavirus has never made any sense ideologically. In other parts of the world (India, etc.) it’s the total opposite (right-wing extra “tough” on the virus). This is just nihilistic, knuckle-dragging, know-nothing posturing.
 

My two cents:

That’s the United States. Half of the population having Mammon as their god to the point of devolving into crackpot theories, and the other half indistinguishable from the Jews regarding what the Talmud says: that the best among the Goyim must be exterminated.

In a video, yesterday I listened a few words from William Pierce that Hunter Wallace embedded in his site. I had not listened to Pierce for some time and it made me reiterate what I already knew: that the Pierce who spoke once a week on the radio and the Pierce of Who We Are are two Pierces. Similarly, the Hitler who spoke to the masses was not the same as the one who spoke to his friends in private.

Perhaps the reason the National Alliance doesn’t publish Who We Are (the equivalent of Hitler’s table talks) is for not showing the most authentic Pierce to ordinary people, as Who We Are touches on taboo issues for American white nationalists: Nordicism, anti-Christianity, exterminationism and the story worth investigating to understand the white man is the European, not the American.

There is another problem with Pierce’s referred speech. Like Hitler’s public speeches, it seems monocausal, and it contrasts sharply with the posts we’ve been collecting from Robert Morgan about the American Civil War, which show that a fanatic, suicidal anti-racism already existed in the US before Jews came en masse to this continent. But the bottom line is what Will Westcott said above: almost all Americans, on the right or left, are bad people in one way or another. The only way to save them would be precisely what

 
Morgan said five years ago:

In order to accept being called a racist or a Nazi with equanimity, normal American whites would have to reconcile that with their country’s history of being violently opposed to racism of any kind, from the Civil War forward. They would have to admit to themselves and to others that all of that blood shed in trying to stamp out racism had been shed in vain, and in fact, worse than in vain, in an evil cause. They would have to admit that their ancestors were evil, and that they themselves had also been evil before they saw the light and became racists.

It’s safe to say the chances of that happening on a mass scale are almost zero.

Published in: on July 7, 2020 at 11:45 am  Comments (6)  

Desperate idiots

J. Hart: Slaves were still held in several Northern states as late as 1865, so your point falls apart.

Robert Morgan: See? These idiots are desperate.

What’s the point of this objection? It’s just a lame attempt to cloud the issue. I think we can assume that the Christian fanatics who instigated and conducted the War to abolish slavery knew that, once won, it would then be abolished throughout the US. That should go without saying.

Kevin Barrett: That some might see the Civil War as primarily about the right of secession rather than slavery…

Robert Morgan: The sociology of the effort that exists to rewrite history and make the Civil War not about slavery, but about tariffs, or the right of succession, or virtually anything else, is very interesting, but the idea itself is ludicrous. If it wasn’t the point of the War, how then to explain the abolition of slavery and the gift of citizenship and the vote to negroes immediately afterward? This is something the nearly 100% white and Christian citizenry of the USA decided at that time to impose upon itself nationwide, not just upon the defeated South. It didn’t require “brainwashing” by radio, television, and film, because none of those things existed at the time. It required no Frankfurt School, no Jewish educational establishment, no AIPAC, no ADL or NAACP. It required no antifa. These white Christians did it all by themselves, to themselves.

Of course, those who want to claim the War wasn’t about slavery will also claim that there were plans to deport the negroes rather than make them citizens. But these “plans” were never more than Christian pipe dreams that depended upon all the negroes volunteering to leave. The bitter truth is that nobody had any plan to round them all up and deport them whether they wanted to go or not. That was considered so far out of the question it wasn’t even a topic of discussion at the time.

It’s only natural that modern-day Christians on the right don’t want their religion to take the blame for this, and don’t want to see their ancestors as fools. So rather than admit the truth, that the War really was driven by Christian fanaticism, expressed as a commitment to abolish slavery and assert “the brotherhood of man” through support of a radical racial egalitarianism, they strain desperately to make it about something else.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of historical illiterates who, with equal desperation, want to believe their excuses.

Published in: on June 27, 2020 at 9:44 am  Comments (1)  

Negrolatry’s religious roots

Left, image of carpetbagger scene in Gone with the Wind, a war that occurred at a time when there was no mass media owned by Jewry, no kike educational establishment, and before mass immigration of Jews even began.

There are polls on Twitter asking what is the cause of the negrolatry with options to answer but no option mentions Christianity. But yesterday there was an exchange in Unz Review that throws light on the subject:

Mark Tapley said: You always drag Christianity into everything…

Robert Morgan replied: Understanding that Christianity is the origin of white people’s delusion of racial equality is essential. It doesn’t require me to “drag in” anything. Anyone who has an understanding of the history of the nineteenth century in America will understand the importance of the Christian fanaticism that characterized it. Of course, that obviously doesn’t include either you or your buddy Johnny. These religious revivals, known as the “Great Awakenings”, were closely bound up with abolitionism.

The white people today who are getting on their knees in front of negroes and literally licking their boots are the spiritual heirs of these Christian fanatics, whether they know it or not.

Mark Tapley said: None of the northern troops would have fought to free black people that they cared nothing about one way or the other. Christianity was not a factor or an influence on the War.

Robert Morgan replied: This is just wrong, whether you are speaking from ignorance (most likely) or are just lying. America was an intensely Christian nation at the time, and slavery had been a hotly contested issue from the founding of the country on up to the outbreak of war over it in 1861. There had always been a deep strain of Christianity-inspired anti-racism that characterized its political life, and it continues today. In fact, five of the thirteen original states in early America had already granted citizenship and the vote to negroes.

There’s quite a bit of interesting history involved with this discussed at considerable length in the Dred Scott case from 1856.

Granada diptych

Flemish painters cultivated the theme of the Pietà with singular devotion. Mary’s group cries the dead Jew, as does the apostle John in this painting of Hans Memling in the Royal Chapel of Granada. (In my book with large illustrations where details can be appreciated, the tears are visible.) Memling also painted white people in hell, as in Last Judgement (oil on wood, 1466-1473) and Triptych of Earthly Vanity (oil on oak panel, 1485).

History has enormous inertia. What the vast majority of racially conscious whites have not seen is that, a doctrine that induces infinite guilt among whites like the Christian, leaves a huge mark once all of this crying before the corpse of a dead Jew is overcome by secularism.

It is no coincidence that the nation most dedicated to protecting Jews and defaming the memory of racially awakened Germany has been the nation that, full of guilt and full of good Christians, had waged an anti-white war in the 1860s as so many times Robert Morgan has discussed on Unz Review.

Published in: on September 6, 2019 at 12:01 pm  Comments Off on Granada diptych  

Latest Morgan comments

Jonathan Revusky: “Oh, c’mon. The real history of all that is much more murky and complex.”

Complexify and obfuscate all you want, but what it comes down to is either the preservation of the white race is important to American whites or it isn’t.

The incorporation of negroes into post-Civil War America on equal footing with whites settled that question in the negative. All that remained was to devise the technical means of carrying out the integration. What’s happening today was set in motion 150 years ago. Except for a few isolated individuals such as these mass shooters, most whites seem at peace with it. If they weren’t there’d be many more such incidents, and “white racist” or “white supremacist” would be a badge of honor instead of an epithet.

Jonathan Revusky: “That statement is just plain dishonest.”

The statement is both easy to understand and accurate. That political equality would inevitably promote social equality and race mixing was obvious.

Sean McBride: “The unstated assumption in this Judeocentric and paranoid belief system is that Jews comprise a super-race that can bend all non-Jews to their will through magical operations of some kind.”

No, not magic. The usual story is that Jews control everyone else through their control of money, and through their domination of cultural choke points such as law, education, and mass media. But this ignores the fact that throughout history, exploited people have stood up to tyranny even at the cost of their own lives. For the question “Why don’t they stand up now?” the anti-Semites have no good answer.

It doesn’t seem to occur to them that it could be that the vast majority of whites actually agree with the cultural changes the anti-Semites deplore, or at least, aren’t sufficiently worried by them to want to revolt. They just keep on banging the drum anyway, hoping to “wake people up”. And of course, that won’t happen to any great degree, and can’t, because most are already as “awake” as they want to be. Right wing politics is a cottage industry, supporting a number of grifters posing as leaders, running the gamut from Rush Limbaugh to David Duke.

John Derbyshire: “With a hundred thousand people a month coming in across our southern border without permission, terms like “invasion” and “ethnic replacement” don’t seem hyperbolic to me… [but the shooter] was insane; and yes, the guy is a psychopathic monster.”

How else to repel an invasion but by force? Politely ask them to leave? You may say let the gov’t handle it, but plainly, it hasn’t and won’t.

Bardon Kaldian: “So, black worship among some/many whites mystifies me. I just cannot get it, both at visceral & rational levels.”

You shouldn’t have slept through class during Anti-Semitism 101. Don’t you know that whites are easily programmed by the mass media, education, and gov’t to believe anything the Jews want them to believe? As a consequence of their reprogramming, the North American stink ape, once held in contempt by white people (or so the story goes), now are worshipped as gods by them, very similar to the way cows are sacred in India.

Nicolás Palacios Navarro: “I think what stops a lot of us from being honest with ourselves about these kinds of subjects is how hate of hatred itself is inculcated into some of us from a very young age. To ‘give in’ to hate has become a moral crime in and of itself.”

This is the secularization of Christianity. That God is Love is one of the foundational lies of that religion. However, if God is Love, what does that make you if you are a hater? In a culture shaped by Christianity, one who hates automatically becomes part of Satan’s army; a devil incarnate.

Nicolás Palacios Navarro: “Hatred is not only a perfectly natural human emotion, it is also the catalyst for change and justice. To stigmatize hate is like neutralizing an opponent before they can even express dissent, let alone plan or act strategically.”

The world described by Darwin is a world of struggle, a war of all against all, in which all life ultimately ends in death and corporeal dissolution. In such a world, if there is a human emotion that could be said to characterize it, it’s hate, not love.

Counterinsurgency: “Hatred is the emotion engendered by serious threats to one’s life or the lives of ones dependents or the people who must remain alive as a support network for the aforementioned. That’s it.”

You’ve failed to understand what I said. Hatred is much more than that. It powers the whole world. That’s why the Christian lie that God is Love is such an outrageous imposture.

Published in: on August 14, 2019 at 4:43 pm  Comments (2)  

American Civil War – Round 2


Above, first Archivist of the United States R.D.W. Connor receiving the film Gone with the Wind from Senator Walter F. George of Georgia (on the left) and Loew’s Eastern Division Manager Carter Barron, 1941.
 
Two years ago the System ambushed the first comparatively massive demonstration of white advocates, in the American city Charlottesville. The System used the police to push the peaceful protesters toward the street where Antifa was awaiting them. During the skirmish, one of the lads who protested the removal of a Confederate statue, fleeing the Antifa blows to his car, ran away and ran over the opposite group of protesters. Although the videos show that this lad had been attacked by Antifa, the judicial system ignored them and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

President John F. Kennedy once said that Hitler’s figure would be vindicated in the future. Unfortunately, the System has made it altogether clear that it doesn’t give a damn about Kennedy’s admonition, that he who makes peaceful revolution impossible makes violent revolution inevitable.

These days, social media is talking a lot about a Second Civil War in the US. Last week I just linked one of John Mark’s most recent videos when thoughtpolice removed it. Although Mark uploaded it again to his YouTube channel, he is making a backup on another platform. A couple of days ago, in Unz Review Adunai commented about Mark’s videos on Civil War 2:

This Civil War is the last chance for the Whites both to reassert their dominance and, more importantly even, to purify their ideology out of the cuckservative ballast. The greatest loss would be a victory for the centrist alt-lite or alt-right—they are as much on the path to extinction as Republicans or Democrats, they’re just walking there slower. But I remain optimistic—any serious civil unrest, especially the one where the White side starts winning, will force the Judeo-Christian system to reveal its true colours and start the direct genocide of the White race.

As John Mark says, the White victory is almost certain. The strongholds of the Christian [axiologists] are in the cities, and the power grid is vulnerable. What he does miss, however, is that Washington can invite a million Chinese soldiers to the ports of California that will swing to the East killing anyone fair-skinned. This war will not be isolated.

I would answer Adunai’s concern about the Chinese in this way: Neither he nor Mark are taking into account that the dollar is going to collapse, probably before social unrest intensifies.

Regardless of the Austrian economists’ prediction, anyone who has not seen the 1939 film Gone With the Wind should watch it now: testimony of much healthier times. I had the opportunity to watch it in one of those movie theatres that looked like opera houses. I remember that, decades ago, my mother made a compassionate comment in the theatre about the Southerners when a liberated Negro was travelling, singing in a horse-driven carriage, to the recently conquered South.

Published in: on August 12, 2019 at 3:53 pm  Comments (3)  

Lincoln refutes monocausalism

Editor’s note: This is a corollary to ‘Is Kevin MacDonald a charlatan?’ It seems a falsehood, but a single 340-word comment from Robert Morgan in the comments section of a discussion forum has more value than the scholarly essays published that same day in all alt-right sites!

How is that possible? For the same reason that in Copernicus’ time a single text by him was worth more than all the texts of Ptolemaic astronomy still in vogue at the beginning of the 16th century.

As seen in the texts of the Nazi leadership, including some SS pamphlets and the Führer’s intimate talks, the Germans were aware of the Judeo-Christian problem. Both Judaism and the Christian churches were equally mentioned as the foe.

American white nationalism has represented a regression toward geocentrism, so to speak. Unlike Europeans, a substantial number of Americans cling to their parents’ Christianity, thus the Copernican revolution in the American psyche that could have been born with a seminal book, Who We Are by Pierce, never happened. (In recent threads of discussion I’ve complained that Pierce’s story of the white race—and remember the power of stories—is no longer available in the market.)

Make no mistake: within their life spans, adult American racists won’t be cured of their schizophrenia (anti-Semites who obey the ethno-suicidal commandment of a Jew). It is imperative that sites like The West’s Darkest Hour start to convince racist teenagers that the white nationalist movement represents a gigantic cognitive regression compared to National Socialism.

Morgan, who apparently is American, has tried to communicate with his countrymen but the self-righteousness of the latter prevents them from seeing a simple truth. The main argument of Morgan in his unsuccessful attempts to communicate with them is that Lincoln and the American Civil War refute the notion that the Jewish quarter is solely responsible for white decline, as if whites were not free agents. (Remember: the civil war happened when Jews had not taken over the American media yet.)

The following is just a portion of Morgan’s relatively recent discussions in a forum:
 

______ 卐 ______

 

“The civil war, and it’s aftermath, never intended these inferiors to live amongst us as equals, they are this nation’s biggest liability…”

Sure. It was a complete accident. (/sarc)

“Let us discard all this quibbling about this man and the other man; this race and that race and the other race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed in an inferior position; discarding our standard that we have left us. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people throughout this land, until we shall once more stand up declaring that all men are created equal.” —Abraham Lincoln (Lincoln-Douglas debates, 1858).

“As Abraham Lincoln said in his speeches, it was never his intent to let these feral animals loose in society.”

Nope. In his last speech before being assassinated he proposed making them citizens and giving them the vote.

“The amount of constituency, so to speak, on which the new Louisiana government rests, would be more satisfactory to all, if it contained fifty, thirty, or even twenty thousand, instead of only about twelve thousand, as it does. It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers. … The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end. Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them? —Abraham Lincoln, last public address, Washington, D.C., April 11, 1865.

“Lincoln … betrayed his own people. If you read his earlier speech with Douglas, he sure didn’t sound like the Lincoln you are quoting.”

That’s right. He betrayed the white race. I agree that he said some contradictory things, such as the quote you give in rebuttal, but the conclusion you should draw from this is simply that he was a liar. He was such an accomplished liar, in fact, that he still has fans like you defending him even after the horrendous consequences of his betrayal have become apparent.

“However, in his heart of hearts, he knew the negro would never fit in. There was a movement to resettle them in Africa, but to the detriment of our civilization, it never happened.”

Don’t pretend to know what was in his heart of hearts. Judge him on his behavior. He was more responsible than any other man for the racial disaster that has overtaken America. The “movement” to resettle negroes elsewhere never got off the ground because it was a joke from the outset.

“Looking in hindsight which is 20/20, do you think he would propose doing anything with these people other than removing them from our shores? I don’t!”

Apparently you are unaware that it was only voluntary self-deportation that was ever under discussion. Nobody, including Lincoln, ever spoke in terms of forcibly rounding up all the negroes and deporting them whether they wanted to go or not.

Organizations such as the American Colonization Society were set up to assist those who volunteered to depart, but never even broached the idea of forcibly removing them.

“Very intelligent and served as soldiers are qualifiers. How many negroes were very intelligent, and how many served as soldiers, Dr. Morgan? If he were for universal suffrage, why didn’t he say so?”

There were hundreds of thousands of negroes who served in the Union Army, and they weren’t any more intelligent than the ones infesting America today. He didn’t say he was for universal suffrage because he was a liar, and knew the idea wouldn’t have been acceptable to his audience. Remember that at the time, even white women didn’t have the vote.

“America was once an unapologetically white nation…”

I have to disagree with this. There was never a time, even in colonial days, when America was without at least a substantial undercurrent of white self-contempt. Abolitionists of the day, adhering to an egalitarianism inspired by their Christianity, regarded race-based slavery as an abomination. In fact, free blacks were legally equal to whites in several of the original colonies, and were extended the franchise in some. This undercurrent of white self-contempt ultimately resulted in the Civil War, at the end of which blacks were made the legal equals of whites nationwide; and this at a time when the country was virtually 100% white and Christian. This act of racial self-abnegation is still without parallel, even in modern times.

* * *

Having studied this issue, I’ve come to the conclusion that preserving their own race is very low on the list of white Americans’ priorities, if it registers at all. Mostly, the opposite is true. The common opinion among them is that any concern for preserving the white race is “racist”, akin to Nazism, and deeply Evil. Of course, without a conscious effort to preserve their race, it’s obviously not going to survive.

Consequently, American whites accept their own looming racial extinction with apparent equanimity. They have approved it directly through their own actions, and indirectly through laws passed by their representatives, for over a hundred and fifty years. They’ve had plenty of time to reverse course, and haven’t done so. Again and again, white dissidents have stepped forward to warn them, and they have been ignored or destroyed. All their efforts have done is underscore the fact that saving a race of people that doesn’t want to be saved is an exercise in futility [editor’s emphasis]. I must conclude that if there is hope, it won’t be found in politics.

“I’ve got news for you snowflakes. A majority of white Americans before 1970 were bigoted.”

Sure they were! That’s why, immediately after slaughtering hundreds of thousands of each other in the Civil War, they gave negroes citizenship, legal equality, and the vote.

It’s interesting to me though that the idea that most whites were bigoted prior to (fill in the year) seems to be a persistent delusion of right wingers on the left half of the IQ bell curve.

I’ve seen it asserted many times. But if “traditionalists” haven’t controlled America’s race policies since the Civil War, what the hell is the “tradition” you think you are defending? The only tradition America has with regard to race is a constant implementation of ever more race-blind egalitarianism. That is what the majority of whites approved for the last 150 years, and continue to approve.

Published in: on June 7, 2019 at 11:34 am  Comments (2)  

Is Kevin MacDonald a charlatan?

by Robert Morgan

Kevin MacDonald is more or less a charlatan who, by exclusively focusing on Jews, is unable to explain a great deal of self-destructive white racial behavior. For example, in his magnum opus The Culture of Critique, he confines his analysis to the twentieth century without considering what went before, so naturally a distorted picture results. He neglects to even note in passing that in the nineteenth century, an America nearly 100% white and Christian, in the grip of a religious mania, tore itself in two in order to free their negro slaves and grant them full citizenship and the vote.

All the rest of the racial disaster that has unfolded since then has only been a matter of living up to commitments written in the ocean of white blood shed in that conflict.

It would seem that almost the only way to explain this behavior in the absence of a “hostile elite” (trade mark) is to say that Christianity itself from the beginning has been a Jewish plot to undermine the white race; and indeed, some (Nietzsche, Revilo Oliver, and others) have taken this tack. For MacDonald, this isn’t a satisfactory alternative though, since that would entail giving credit to Jews for white civilizational accomplishments (or at least, what MacDonald considers accomplishments) during the period of Christendom’s expansion. It would amount to admitting that there’s been a symbiosis between whites and Jews that has been at times beneficial to whites.

Because he tries to view everything through this distorting lens of cultural conflict between Jews and whites, and to scrupulously avoid indicting Christianity, he has to come up with absurdities like “pathological altruism”, and white “guilt”, which supposedly the Jews are able to manipulate and direct outside of white control. He sees these psychological mechanisms as rooted in genetic difference between the races, yet is unable to explain why pre-Christian or non-Christian societies never suffered from such problems. Ancient Rome even had plenty of powerful Jews and didn’t; nor, at least until after the Christian takeover, did it have a “hostile elite”.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s Note:

I placed a quotation mark after the title only because I believe that MacDonald is still useful when trying to debunk the lunatic fringe in white nationalism. (See, for example, what I responded here to a regular visitor who literally considers Jews as non-human, demonic entities.)

Published in: on June 6, 2019 at 2:35 pm  Comments (6)  

Robert Morgan’s comment

“Stop blaming 20-year-old girls with tattoos and put the blame exactly where it belongs the White men of the greatest generation.”

Yes, those intrepid Nazi-fighters of the greatest (i.e. stupidest) generation were so very pleased with themselves for having destroyed the eruption of white supremacy in Europe; so intoxicated by their own virtue that they decided to inflict similar destruction on themselves!

But this was only a continuation of a pattern begun in the previous century, when white men of the North overwhelmed and destroyed the white supremacist culture of the white men of the South, and then, drunk on their own goodness, rewrote their national Constitution to include negroes as citizens fully equal to whites.

Surely these wonderfully Christian actions will merit a kiss from rabbi Jesus when the white race finally goes extinct and its shade floats up into the sky!

White men. Still crazy after all these years!

Published in: on May 6, 2019 at 9:11 pm  Comments (7)  

Robert Morgan’s comment

This idea, pervasive on the right, that white people can’t defend themselves is a pet peeve of mine. Granted, there would be penalties for doing so, but they could be a race of Brenton Tarrants if they wanted to be. The truth is, nobody is responsible for white compliance with the culture of political correctness but white people. White people invented this culture of totalitarian control and worship of the Other. They enforce it and inflict it on themselves. The idolization of the Jew Jesus is the prototype for 2000 years of it. For what was and is Christianity but worship of the racial Other? During the Christian takeover of Western civilization almost every vestige of what preceded was intentionally destroyed by the fanatic devotees of the crucified rabbi. Temples to the gods were demolished, pagan philosophers were tortured and murdered, whole libraries consigned to flames, and—the ultimate in “de-platforming”—even the possession of pagan literature was declared a capital offense.

That these totalitarian trends again visible in the modern world continue and arguably even originate from America, a country founded by Christian religious fanatics, does not surprise me, nor should it surprise anyone. Americans have their own history of worship of the racial Other. They fought a Civil War over it, the point of which was to elevate the negro to a status equal to themselves, as shown by the subsequent passage of amendments to the Constitution granting him citizenship and the vote. A big part of this was again driven by religious mania, notably white and Christian.

So, “Whites do not enjoy these same privileges, …”? I don’t buy it. They have all the privileges they allow themselves. The only thing keeping them in check is their own unwillingness to act in their own defense. Throwing off two thousand years of religious nuttery and prostration before the racial Other isn’t going to be easy. It will take a cultural revolution, and can’t happen without lots of bloodshed and tears. But possible? Yes.