July 11, 2019
On Tuesday, Tucker Carlson did a segment on Ilhan Omar, pointing out the uncontroversial fact that she hates America, even after she was brought into this country from the poorest country on earth out of misplaced altruism and made into one of the most powerful women in America.
Tucker pointed out that she expresses her hatred for the people of this country by continually attacking us all as “racists.”
As I am very much too well aware, this country is very, very low on racism.
In fact, the people called “racists” are generally significantly less racist than the people who claim to be fighting racism. The goofy cuckservative refrain of “Democrats are the real racists” is actually proven by data (depending on how you define the word “racist”). Conservative people are much more likely to treat everyone equally, regardless of their race, while liberals are much more likely to “code-switch” when talking to nonwhites, effectively acknowledging that they’re stupid and need to be talked down to like they’re children.
WGBH, December 3, 2018:
Much has been written about Hillary Clinton’s code switching — from adapting a smorgasbord of Southern accents, to dropping her “g” sounds from “-ing” words (participles and gerunds) in talks in Ohio and Texas.
Clinton famously caught ire for her comments on the hip-hop morning radio and talk show “The Breakfast Club” in 2016after hosts DJ Envy, Angela Yee and Charlamagne Tha God asked what item the then-presidential candidate always keeps in her bag. “Hot sauce,” Clinton responded, in what was largely interpreted as an attempt to pander to black voters.
According to a new study from a peer-reviewed scientific journal from the American Psychological Association, Clinton is not alone: White liberals dumb themselves down when they speak to minorities, black people in particular.
In the context of a book club email, “a new study suggests that the words you use may depend on whether the club secretary’s name is Emily (“a stereotypically white name,” the study says) or Lakisha (“a stereotypically black name”),” Isaac Stanley-Becker wrote in a Nov. 30 Washington Post article. “If you’re a white liberal writing to Emily, you might use words like ‘melancholy’ or ‘euphoric’ to describe the mood of the book, whereas you might trade these terms out for the simpler ‘sad’ or ‘happy’ if you’re corresponding with Lakisha. But if you’re a white conservative, your diction won’t depend on the presumed race of your interlocutor.”
Reverends Irene Monroe and Emmett G. Price III joined Jim Braude and Margery Eagan on Boston Public Radio for their weekly All Revved Up segment to unpack the phenomenon, which Monroe says is a product of white liberals refusing to acknowledge their own racist behavior.
“You know what I define ‘liberal racism’ to be? I find it to be a toxic mixture of good intentions with unexamined implicit racism,” Monroe said. “It’s the whole idea that ‘I’m going to relate to you, I’m trying to be an ally,’ and they think they’re talking to a child, [and] it’s very patronizing.”
The study describes the behavior as a “competence downshift” exhibited by white liberals.
The counterpoint there is that this “code-switching” that liberals engage in is an attempt to be accommodating to nonwhites. Even if you consider this to be racism because they are acknowledging the difference in the races and the black inability to understand complex language, they are certainly not doing this out of “hatred for the color of the skin,” or out of any form of in-group preference. In fact, it is the opposite.
Accusations of racism in America are almost never true, and even when they are true, they are always mischaracterized for the purpose of defamation. I am pointed at as the peak of global white hatred, and I have never abused or disenfranchised a black person. I have never wished harm on a nonwhite person who was aggressing against me and my own people. I do not desire for other races to be unnecessarily abused or denied of their natural rights to life, liberty and happiness, unless they are infringing on the rights of my own in-group.
In short, white racism, as it is described by the media and political pundits like Ilhan Omar, does not even exist at all. The only people who actually hate people outside of their own in-group, and want to see others suffer out of pure sadism and maliciousness, are the Jews.
The same group that formulated the narrative that we are all racist haters and the same group that organized to flood our nations with these people that they claim we hate for no reason.
(In a follow-up segment on the Omar story on Wednesday, following calls for Tucker to be banned from TV, he blamed the, uh, “American Left,” for Omar’s behavior, saying that certain people in this country had taught her to behave that way.)
It follows then that any accusation of this kind of racism made against white people is a form of defamation, and an attack.
This is what Tucker was pointing out when he talked about Omar using this anti-white slur to attack the native people of this country.
And how did she respond?
By calling him a racist, of course.
Not gonna lie, it’s kinda fun watching a racist fool like this weeping about my presence in Congress 🤣🤣
No lies will stamp out my love for this country or my resolve to make our union more perfect.
They will just have to get used to calling me Congresswoman! https://t.co/nRS13yWivK
— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) July 10, 2019
The only possible response to this attack is to do as I have done here and deconstruct the slur for what it is, and explicate what we all instinctively feel:
- Yes, we are white people and we believe we are a group with collective rights that supersede the rights of individuals.
- Yes, we think we have a right to have our own countries, and decide who is allowed to live in them.
- No, we do not hate people “for the color of their skin.”
- No, we do not want to hurt anyone.
It isn’t especially complicated, and there is no moral argument against it.
There is no actual justification for the claim that white people are the only group that doesn’t deserve their own country. The attempts to justify this claim are nonsensical, and are only able to be forwarded as if they are serious because of the fear people have of being smeared as racist, which has become the modern equivalent of being called a witch or an anti-Christ.
What we saw starting in 2015 was an attempt to force this conversation into the mainstream, and what we saw after that – the complete and total crackdown on any form of free expression, both online via tech censorship and in the real world via the authorities allowing demonstrations to be attacked by antifa – is proof that the system has no ability to engage in this conversation in a serious way.
Our only option at this point is to press forward, and continue to force the discussion.
If the discussion happens, we win by default.
Tucker is right that having Ilhan Omar up there expressing this vitriol is good for America. This situation is so ridiculous that it really does a lot to force the conversation.