Posts tagged race

The Left Hates America…Says the Neo-Secessionist

June 10, 2009 · Filed under Basic Decency, Culture War, Insanity · Tagged , , , , , , , ,


This is exactly the kind of person that really pisses me off. In an unfortunate turn of events for my IQ, I came across his MySpace blog while doing a Google search for someone on the far-right with whom to have a rational debate. Not surprisingly, I suppose, such people don’t seem to exist: all of their blog pages seem to be exactly like this.

Does anyone else notice how the self-prolcaimed “patriot” — like many of his brethren — has the flag of the Confederacy in his background? Apparently there are more people than I’d care to believe who are stupid enough to think that one can be both a neo-secessionist and “pro-America”.

According to him and the rest of the far-right, the only way to prevent the “encroachment” of “inferior cultures” is through “intelligent and traditionalist conservative dialogue” (how many contradictions can you fit into one sentence, really?).

In his status updates, he claims that, “Obama = Lenin = Stalin = Hitler… What is that spook doing?” According to Godwin’s Law, he loses. At everything. Unfortunately for thinking people, it seems that it’s not just him who buys into this kind of whackjobbery perpetuated by right-wing pundits — like Limbaugh.

I could go in-depth about the not-at-all subtle differences between the Democratic Party (on the center-left) and Marxist-Leninism (on the far-left), and the differences and outright hatred between Communists and Nazis, but this douche is clearly a gigantic waste of time.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1) »

Gay, Jewish, and Pissed-Off: A Manifesto (Part I)

May 6, 2009 · Filed under Basic Decency, Culture War, Humor, Internet · Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

1. Just because something has emerged from western culture doesn’t mean that it’s “bad” or “evil” or even must necessarily be questioned, when something from non-western cultures would not be.

Recently, the people in Sudan who were indicted on charges of genocide charged that the ICC was a “racist” organization because it was formed by Western nations. Besides the fact that such allegations are bullshit (23 or so African countries participated in its formation), it shouldn’t matter whether that organization was formed by “western” countries or not. If you have problems with its principles then level an attack against those principles. Just because you happen not to like the fact that white people formed it doesn’t mean that it’s an illegitimate organization — it just means you’re racist.

Which brings me to my next point.

2. Not all white people are racist; not all black people are free from bigotry. This may come as newsflash to some people on the left, but not all non-white people shit ice-cream — and not all white people are evil oppressors. In case you didn’t notice, there were numerous white people who participated in the Civil Rights movement. In fact, if it hadn’t been for white people, African Americans likely still wouldn’t have any rights today. The next time someone calls me a racist because I’m white or don’t happen to support race-based affirmative action, remember that.

And as for black people somehow magically being free from racism — has anyone heard of the Nation of Islam. They believe that white people are all incarnations of the devil or some shit. Now if a bunch of white people ran around claiming that black people were the devil or something, they’d be shut down in like a week as fucking asshats. But no, instead, people like the Nation of Islam attract all kinds of white apologists who attempt to justify their racism, as if “oh, well, it doesn’t count because they were oppressed.”

Or, moving away from racism, doesn’t anyone else want to talk about Prop 8? I mean, sure a lot of it has to do with education, but it doesn’t matter how you analyze it — black people were bigots against queer people. The fact that they were uneducated doesn’t excuse it, it just demonstrates the need to reform the educational system. I don’t recall anyone excusing actions by the KKK by just saying that they’re “uneducated” — how are the actions by Black Churches Any different?

Also, just because I think your music sucks doesn’t mean I’m racist. It just means your music sucks.

3. Not all black people suffer from horrible, horrible oppression. Newsflash, people: not all black people have been called names, beaten, or lynched or even been around or near those things. In fact, there are quite a few of them who are doing quite well for themselves. This is why Affirmative Action is bullshit — or at least race-based affirmative action: there are rich-off-their-asses African-Americans who are getting into universities or who are getting jobs over equally-qualified white poor people. Do I think that white people should get jobs just by virtue of being white? No. But I do think that the fact that someone is poor means that they had to try harder in order to succeed on an equal level. If you’re rich and black, the fact of the matter is that you probably had just as many — if not more — opportunities as someone who is rich and white. But if you’re poor and white, you’ve probably had far fewer opportunities than someone who’s rich and white.

The way the educational system is set up is biased against the poor. Since it’s locally funded, and people frequently live segregated by class, poor school districts frequently face the choice of having less funding or taxing those who can least afford it even more. So while in Trenton, for example, schools are falling apart and the school can barely afford to pay its teachers, the next district over is buying new computers every year or two.

My point here is this: race and class are strongly correlated. But the oppression that is frequently faced by poor African-Americans is also faced by poor whites and poor latinos. Why should wealthy blacks get a foot up over poor whites?

4. Jewish people aren’t white. What’s fun is that for the past two-thousand years, white people — and brown people, and yellow people, and, just, well, everyone (but mostly white people) — have been trying to wipe us (i.e. Jews) off the face of the Earth.

Then, suddenly, after a last big push (i.e. the Holocaust), suddenly Jews are white. Thanks guys. I like how we became white just in time for affirmative action to be put into place. That’s awesome.

You know what college interviews were implemented right? To weed out the Jews and the gays. Then as soon as they were done with that and started to try to encourage non-whites to apply, all of a sudden OH WOW YEAH YOU JEWS HAVEN’T BEEN OPPRESSED AT ALL WELCOME TO THE CLUB. LET’S JUST IGNORE THE PAST 2000 YEARS OF US TRYING TO KILL YOU, AWESOME.

5. There are certain things that are always bad. Just because non-white, non-male, non-straight, or non-”oppressive class” people perpetrate them doesn’t make those things okay. Things such as the Haitian genocide of former slaveowners and their families is abhorrent. There is a line to be drawn between punishment for crimes and unnecessary retribution; and, further, between justified retribution and wholesale slaughter of innocents.

6. All-women’s colleges are sexist; all-black colleges are racist. No. Really. I’m really scratching my head about this one. How much did the left bitch about the fact that “oh, wah, wah, wah, all these schools are men-only, and wah wah wah we have to go to these separate schools.” Okay, so, instead, the deal is that not only can men not go to your special schools, but you also get to go to what used to be male-only schools?

And as for all-black colleges…well, wasn’t there something called the Civil Rights movement that was all about segregation? And then wasn’t there another case called Brown v. Board of Education which said that separate was necessarily unequal. So what’s the deal?

You want to have your cake and eat it too? Why can’t I go to Barnard if I want to? The fact of the matter is that it is better. But I can’t go there? Why? Because I have a penis. OMG I GUESS IM THREATENIN UR RITES OMGOMGOMG.

Assholes.

7. I can still be on the ‘left’ and believe this. Sorry, people, but just because I don’t subscribe to your bullshit identity politics doesn’t mean that you can call up the Leftist Pope and excommunicate me from the Green Party or SDS or whatever. I’m not sure where along the line the Green Party/Socialist Party/the left in general decided to sign a suicide pact by advocating entirely untenable things that are totally unrelated to economics or economic justice (I’m sorry, but what’s the deal with spelling “women” incorrectly? It’s not “womyn”. It’s women.), but I’m pretty damn sure my name wasn’t on that document.

Continued in Part II

Leave a comment »

Yes We Can; But So Could They

November 6, 2008 · Filed under Basic Decency, Commentariat, Election 2008, LGBT Issues · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This about summarizes how I feel about the whole gay thing.

This about summarizes how I, as a religious person, feel about the whole gay thing. Click the image for a larger version.

This piece ran in the Commentariat, the Spectator opinion blog.

Last night, when I found out Barack Obama had won, I was ecstatic. I ran out of my dorm with my friends and we, and probably 200 other Columbia students, marched up to Harlem to watch the last few minutes of Obama’s speech.

But when I got back to my computer and television, I was horribly disappointed. The ban on gay marriage in Florida had passed, the ban on gay marriage in Arizona had passed, the ban on gay marriage in California had passed, and the ban on gay adoption in Arkansas had passed. Al Franken looked like he was going to lose to Norm Coleman, and convicted felon Ted Stevens was ahead by three points in Alaska (my friend has vowed to start donating to the Alaskan Independence Party so that incubator of corrupt and incompetant politicians will leave us alone and take their two corrupt Republican senators with them).

I know I should be happy. My friends keep telling me that Barack Obama will be good for gay people. And “at least it’s not McCain”. And yet, for the past eight years — for nearly half of my lifetime — my countrymen have been voting to stop me from having equal rights.

Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1) »

Not Quite Color-Blind, But Not Quite Racist

October 15, 2008 · Filed under Basic Decency, Election 2008, Poll Analysis · Tagged , , , , ,

So I was reading another blog and came across this comment (by the way, the guy who writes it is pretty incredible. I know I have like negative readers, but I’m going to plug him anyway.) The comment brought to mind a Gallup Poll which says,

6% of voters say they are less likely to vote for Barack Obama because of his race, 9% say they are more likely to vote for him, making the impact of his race a neutral to slightly positive factor when all voters’ self-reported attitudes are taken into account.

Perhaps because African-Americans have been traditionally Democratic (as a demographic they trend about 80+% Democratic) the Obama campaign didn’t see a bump similar to that received by John F. Kennedy for being Catholic. Before the 1960 election, the Catholic community was largely split (mostly on the basis of class, with working-class Catholics voting Democratic and wealthier Catholics voting Republican). But when Kennedy ran, he brought millions of Catholic voters to the Democratic side, at least for that election. In the years since then, of course, Catholics have become decreasingly Democratic as a whole (largely, it is likely, because of the new salience of social issues in American politics). Obviously, Kennedy’s religion was a big factor, with many Americans worried that the United States would be controlled by the Pope if he won. As history has shown, this was not the case. So, of course, there were many Americans who voted for Nixon on that basis. But then, there were millions of Americans who voted for him on that basis as well.

In the same way, millions of non-white (the Gallup Organization polled on the basis of white/non-white, because apparently Latino/as and African-Americans must have the same opinion of an African-American candidate.) voters have flocked to Obama (polling show that around 13% percent are more likely to vote for Obama) where as around 7% of white voters say they will be less likely to vote for him because of his race. Taken as is, this would approximately equalize (“non-whites” make up about one in three people in the United States, I believe, so the ratio would be 2 white: 1 non-white). However, there are also the 6% of white people who are more likely to vote for Obama based on his race, perhaps as a means by which to parade their tolerance. This, of course, is not offset by the 4% of non-whites who are less likely to vote for Obama because of his race (my guess is this is the produce of African-American-Latino racial/ethnic tensions, since I can’t really imagine all that many African-Americans being turned off by an African-American candidate simply because of his race).

In the end, it seems, polling would indicate Barack Obama may actuall benefit from being an African-American in this presidential race. However, given how unacceptable racism is in today’s society (though those disinclined to vote for him because of his race might claim they aren’t racist, they, quite frankly, are) it is possible that fewer people intend to vote for Obama than say they will. Of course, the Bradley Effect was first observed 26 years ago, during the Regan administration, and when the subject was only ahead in some polls. All three factors have changed.

First, it is now 2008. and there have been several indications that the effect has diminished, especially in recent years. While the examples I cite can also be found on Wikipedia, I’ll recite them here anyway. In Louisiana, Bobby Jindal (R), an Indian-American, ran and lost in 2003. While early polling had indicated he had a lead, pre-election polling showed that his lead had disappeared prior to the election. In 2006, Harold Ford, Jr., ran for senator of Tennessee and lost in a close race. Polling showed, however, that, despite not exactly being a historical bastion of tolerance, his loss was not the result of massive lying by white people to pollsters. I think, however, that we should all keep an eye out for a similar effect, especially in Southern and Southwestern states, on LGBT candidates in the future, just as soon as people stop shooting them.

I think I’ll skip my second point, largely due to the fact that I am lazy and don’t quite want to wade into the issue of massive Republican implicit racism, though I think anyone who watched the GOP national convention this year, or any year prior, will have noticed by now that there are about four black people in the entire crowd (and how much do you want to bet they’re half-white?).

Third, while the subject of the original Bradley effect was only ahead in some polls, Barack Obama has the lead in every single poll, and a statistically significant lead in all of them as well.

So, given all of this evidence, and given the recent Gallup polling that shows that Obama may, in fact, benefit from being the first African-American major-party candidate for President, I think–and hope–that the Bradley Effect is a thing of the past.

Leave a comment »