Showing posts with label hate crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hate crime. Show all posts

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Andrea Ostrov Letania: The Real Agenda behind ELENA KAGAN'S Anti-"Hate Speech" Jewsade(Jewish Crusade).


Some thoughts on the ALTERNATIVE RIGHT article:

http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/untimely-observations/elena-kagan-professor-hate-crime/#disqus_thread

Elena Kagan:

"This Essay on the regulation of hate speech and pornography addresses both practicalities and principles. I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

This is pure rubbish. Inequality is not the product of speech but of race and culture. In Europe, there was lots of anti-Jewish speech in the late 19th and early 20th century, but Jews outperformed the gentiles and became richer and more influential.
Jewish-Americans are many times more successful than Polish-Americans. Is it because of excessive anti-Polish hate speech in America? Who believes such nonsense?
Pop cultural representations of Asians and gays have been condescending and demeaning for a long long time, but both groups seem to be doing better than the white average.
Our popular culture--Hollywood, TV, schools, music, etc--has given more glowing and positive coverage of blacks than of any other race. MSM even go out of their way suppress negative news stories about blacks--corruption, crime, lunacy, etc. Yet, black failure continues.
Since the 60s, 'liberal' became a dirty word, a political epithet, yet your average white liberal is likely to be more educated and successful than your average white conservative.
I don't see much anti-Mexican speech in our culture, yet Mexicans remain economically less successful than most other groups. Asian-Indians are often mocked on TV and there's a lot of yellow peril saber rattling about the Chinese, yet Asian-Indian-Americans and Chinese-Americans do better than most whites. Kagan's theory is just a lot of horseshit. I'm sure PC drones believe it, but Kagan is too smart to really believe it herself. She has ulterior motives.

So, let's cut the bull. Elena isn't really worried about racial or gender inequality. For one thing, she doesn't seem to be bothered by the fact that Jews are heavily overrepresented in the most prestigious and influential fields. Hmm, could Jews be outperforming white-Americans and Muslim-Americans because our culture is loving toward Jews and hateful toward whites and Muslims? And I doubt if Kagan is bothered by black overrepresentation in sports and popular music. Gee, could Mexicans, Asians, and Muslism be underrepresented in football, basketball, and hip hop because 'hate speech' against them have hurt their self-esteem, thus their ability to succeed in running and jumping?

This whole thing is not about racial or sexual inequality. For one thing, black women do better than black males, and US colleges are now 60% women and 40% men. And gays, who are 2% of the population, control about 25% of arts and culture.

This whole thing is really about CONTROL and JEWISH POWER. Elena, like so many other Jews, is anxious about non-Jews growing alarmed about Jewish power, privilege, and influence. Especially with the internet and decline of MSM, more people are discovering sites like VDARE and Alt.Right and finding out who the real POWER ELITE in this country is and what they are up to. This is what Kagan and Google boys are really afraid of. But they can't spell it out, so they pretend to oppose 'hate speech' in the name of poor minorities.

When Jews weren't the power elite in this country and were suspected of radical/communist/leftist ties in the 5os and 60s, Jews were for 100% free speech. They were radical defenders of the 1st amendment. Back then, Jews were even willing to protect American Nazi and KKK speech. The real reason for this was to protect leftist Jewish speech, and in order to do so, Jews even protected Nazi speech to demonstrate that they stood for freedom of speech on principle.
Since Jews back then were still vulnerable in terms of power, they relied on the guarantee of the constitution. But now that Jews control most of the powerful institutions in this country, they no longer need the 1st amendment. They have the economic, media, academic, political, and cultural power to do as they please. The 1st amendment, which had once protected leftist Jewish speech from the white majority, now mainly serves to protect rightist white speech from the Jewish power elite. So, Jews want to remove this protection. Jews once defended Nazi speech in order to protect subversive Jewish speech. Now, Jews seek to suppress white rightist speech in order to consolidate Jewish elite power.

Leftist hate speech never bothered the likes of Kagan. Marxist ideas led to communism, which only killed around 100 million people in the 20th century. But, Marxist speech is okay with Kagan since it can still be used to destroy nationalism, culturalism, and racism. And Zionist speech doesn't bother her either, despite what it has led to the Middle East. No, she's only after white rightist speech since it speaks truth to Jewish power.

If rightist speech should be curtailed because it led to the Holocaust, shouldn't leftist speech be curtailed since it led to the Bolshocaust? But then, Marxism has long been associated with Jewish power, and Jews still feel a fondness for it. Through Marxism, Jews got to punish and kill millions of 'hateful' Russians. They smashed over 50,000 churches. While preaching equality to the masses, the Jewish communist elites enjoyed the best schools, best living conditions, best privileges in the Soviet Union.
Well, we have the same thing in the United States. Kagan is a child of superprivilege who's never rubbed shoulders with real people in her life, yet she acts like Ms(or Mr.)Egalitarianism. In practice, Jews seek the most power and privilege for themselves. In words, Jews yammer about equality and 'social justice', but it's never at their own expense but at the expense of middle and lower class white gentiles(who are certainly NOT privileged or favored in anything). Notice how Kagan isn't bothered even in the slightest by Jewish overrepresentation at Harvard, Hollywood, Wall Street, MSM, Law firms, medical institutions, etc. No, she only gets antsy about white male gentile representation at fire departments. This is how most two-faced Jews operate.

We also need to understand how and why Jews see us the way they do. Steve Sailer once wrote that blacks, being less intelligent and more aggressive, are more likely to fall into stupid or destructive behavior if you 'let the good times roll.' In other words, freedom is more dangerous to blacks since they have less self-control and self-understanding.

Jews see us the same way. Jewish IQ is 15 pts higher than that of white gentiles, which is 15 pts higher than that of blacks. How we see blacks, Jews see us. Jews fear that we may not be able to handle too much freedom. We are too stupid and irrational; too much freedom for us may lead to 'let the Jew heads roll'.
Just as some of us reluctantly praise Fidel Castro for keeping the blacks in Cuba in line, American Jews--now that they have elite power--want to control our minds and behavior and keep us in line, because if they don't, we may come to see the true nature of Jewish power, grow angry and resentful, and rise up to tear down the Jewtocracy.
That is what this is really about.

-----------------------------------------

Elena Kagan is not fighting for equality for defending Jewish inequality. If any group in the US is unequal and over-privileged in the most prestigious and powerful institutions, it is the Jewish community.

The role of politics is TO SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER. Since Jews are the most powerful, we should be speaking truth to Jewish power. This is what Kagan and her liberal Jewish buddies are really afraid of. They wanna label as 'hate speech' any expression that dares to speak truth to Jewish power. By making a big stink about 'hate speech', Kagan hopes to distract our attention from Jewish power and fool people into thinking that WHITE GENTILES are most powerful and that they use 'hate speech' to keep down blacks and Hispanics, whose only defenders are noble saintly Jews.
It is a form of political blackmail employed by Jews. Jews are telling white gentiles, "If you dare criticize our Jewish power, we will use our power in the media, law, and government to set the black and brown dogs to bite your ass."

Also, it is simply not true that 'hate speech' leads to white privilege in the US. If anything, the slightest whiff of 'racist' speech or expression by any white guy in any profession--especially the privileged and prestigious ones--gets him demoted, disgraced, fired, dragged through the mud, discredited, and etc. If anything, even without 'hate speech' laws, the worst thing a white person can do in terms of power, influence, and prestige is to say anything that is politically incorrect about race(and increasingly sex and homosexuality). How 'hate speech' is a social or ecnonomic advantage to whites is beyond me. Even sending a private email about Race and IQ gets a Harvard student ostracized and attacked by the Dean of College herself. Look what happened to Jimmy the Greek and James Watson. Even liberal Larry Summers got in hot water for merely speculating there might be sexual differences in math and science.

Also, there is more than one kind of 'hate speech'. There is the superiorist or supremacist kind employed by the privileged and powerful toward the weak and powerless. Whites in South Africa had such attitudes towared blacks, Jews in Israel likewise toward Palestinians. But, 'hate speech' has also been the function of the weak and powerless. Many Poles and Russians expressed anti-Jewish sentiments out of envy and resentment at Jewish economic and cultural superiority. Same in Hungary. In those cases, 'hate speech' was pro-egalitarian, for it targeted the Jew for being TOO rich, TOO privileged, TOO influential, TOO well-connected, etc.
Communism was essentially the radical Jewish appropriation of mass envy and resentment toward the rich. If populist-nationalists identified Jews with elite power and privilege, communists tended to target gentile elites as the bad guys. In communist Russia, many bourgeois Jews joined the communist movement to attack and destroy the goy elites and to gain control of the goy masses. We're seeing roughly the same pattern in the US. American Jews are using the politics of egalitarianism to preserve their own elite privileges while attacking the white gentile elites and muffling the freedom of the white masses. Frank Rich's noxious and rabid fuming about the mostly white Tea Parties should tell us what and how liberal Jews really think. What is Elena Kagan but Frank Rich in drag?

Indeed, much of anti-Jewish expressions in America have an element of egalitarianism since many Americans of all races--white, brown, black, yellow, Muslim, etc--are deeply unsettled by the power of the Jewish elite. Jews are 2% of the population but control much of news media, Hollywood-TV-music industry, Ivy League Schools, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, etc. For all we know, Jews own 40% of the wealth in this country.

This is why Jews really fear 'hate speech'. Not because it violates or is an affront to egalitarianism but because it speaks truth to Jewish elitism. But being ever so cunning and clever, Jews always try to defend their own tribal interests as a noble and saintly effort to help the underprivileged or disenfranchised or whatever.

If Kagan is really worried about inequality, she should call for suppression of freedom for Jews, for it was the emancipation of the Jewry which led to unprecedented levels of inequality. With freedom, Jews used their superior intelligence, brilliance, innovative spirit, social networking, managerial skills, and ruthlessness to gain unprecedented levels of wealth and power in Europe--in Russia, Germany, Hungary, Poland, France, England, etc. If Kagan is really into equality, she should note that Germany has been more equal with no Jews or few Jews(or suppressed Jews)--from Nazi era until today--than with free emancipated Jews. Jews simply outperformed the Germans, the most talented Europeans. In places like Poland and Hungary, Jewish success was even more astounding since most Poles and Hungarians didn't even possess the work ethic and efficiency Germans did. If inequality is the greatest evil, then having Jews in any given country will lead to huge inequalities. Jews have been among the richest people in South Africa too. Get rid of Jews, and a nation will be more equal. It may be equally poor, equally pathetic, equally lacking in innovation, equally lacking in enterprise, but at least it's more equal.
Detroit is very equal. Everyone is poor and stupid.

Inequality in the US had once been partly determined by social and racial discrimination, but that hasn't been the case for quite some time. Inequality today is the result of success, not because we oppress. With freedom and meritocracy, smart and enterprising people are bound to succeed much more than dumb and/or lazy--and all honest people know some races and groups are more intelligent and have more valuable cultural capital. It's not so much because smart and enterprising people oppress the dumb and lazy but because the latter are left behind in the dust in fair competition. Sergei Brin is worth billions while most of us just scrape by. Talk about inequality!! But did Brin succeed by oppressing whites, blacks, browns, etc? No, he just happened to be smarter than most. And what about Michael Jordan?

The irony of all this is that WE are not the ones doing the complaining about inequality. Most conservative white people have a sense of honor and don't begrudge those who've risen to the top through talent and hard work. Rather, it is the most unequal people in America--the rich and powerful Jews--who are bitching and whining most about inequality. Woah, what is going on?
Why are Jewish billionaires and Harvard elites complaining of inequality when they are the main practitioners and beneficiaries of it?
So, we must look for the REAL reason behind liberal Jewish mania over 'hate speech'. We must conclude it is not really about helping blacks and browns from white supremacism but about safeguarding Jewish supremacism from white populism. The real problem of white populism in the eyes of the Jewish elite is not so much that is racially supremacist but because that it is anti-elitist, which means it's potentially anti-Jewish-supremacist since the JEPE--Jewish Power Elite--now owns and controls this country.

If Kagan is really horrified by inequality and wants to do something about it, she should propose that we perform lobotomy on all Jews with IQ higher than 120. That way, we'll have far fewer Jews becoming super billionaires, Hollywood moguls, Ivy League intellectuals, head of pharmaceutical companies, leaders in computer softward, top lawyers, top bankers, and raking in tons of money from all over the world.
And we should kneecap every promising black athlete just so non-blacks get a chance to succeed in pro sports too.

--A.F.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Belleville School Bus Attack Was Racial.





http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/09/tape_shows_beat.php

Initially, the police reported the beating as racially motivated but then back-tracked and stated that it had resulted from a squabble over a seat. I would argue it’s irrelevant whether it was racially MOTIVATED or not. After all, black kids often beat up one another all the time. They sometimes kill one another over gym shoes. So, we cannot say for sure that the white kid got beat up simply because he’s white. True enough.

But, I would argue the beating was still racial IN NATURE even if it weren’t racially MOTIVATED. Consider a case where a man beats up a woman. Suppose he didn’t beat her up because she was a woman but over an argument. Even if the beating wasn’t sexually MOTIVATED, one can still argue that the beating was sexual IN NATURE because the man struck and beat up the woman and not the other way around. Why didn’t the woman beat up the man? Because 99 times out of 100, men are stronger than women. So, even if the man didn’t beat the woman for sexual reasons, the outcome of the violence was sexual in nature just the same. This is why there is a social and moral taboo against men hitting women EVEN when the woman may be in the wrong. Even when a woman slaps a man, we don’t expect a man to beat the crap out of her. At most, we can tolerate him slapping her back or restraining her. A man is not supposed to take advantage of his advantage in physical strength.

So, let us examine the Belleville Overkill again. A black kid first attacked and beat up a white kid who didn’t fight back because he was scared and knew well that if he fought back, he would get hurt even worse. After he got beat up by one Negro punk, others took turns beating him up. Why did the first Negro kid give the white kid a hard time, refusing to share the seat with the him? Because the Negro kid felt nothing but contempt for the weakling white boy. The contempt was racial in nature even if not consciously racially motivated. (Especially with the rise of Rap music, the social ideal within the black community is Da Thug, and ‘faggotyass pussyass mothafuckas’, aka ‘white boys’, are utterly despised.) Why did the Negro boy so readily start punching the white kid? Because he knew that he’d easily whup a white boy’s ass. Why did other black kids enjoy the spectacle? Because it was fun to watch a ‘ faggoty ass white pussy boy’ helplessly get his ass kicked. Why did other white kids in the bus do NOTHING to help the white kid? Because they too feared the stronger and more aggressive black kids. Why did so many blacks find it so amusing? Because blacks routinely make fun of slow, lardy, soft, faggoty ass, and pussy ass white boys are. Black kids laugh at slow white athletes in sports. Black grow up with the full knowledge that in most cases, they can ‘kick the white boy’s ass.’ So, even if the Belleville Incident wasn’t necessarily racially motivated, honest people must say it was indeed racial in nature. Things like that happen all over America–with most of the violence being black-on-white in schools, buses, public spaces, streets, parks, etc–because blacks are stronger than whites.
Why is most sexual violence male-on-female? Because men are stronger. Men don’t walk the streets with fear of female muggers or rapists, but many women do fear male muggers and rapists. Even when women are victims of crime which isn’t sexually motivated, they are victims precisely because they are of the weaker sex. So, male-on-female violence, even when not explicitly sexual in intent, is sexual in nature.
Same must be said for racial violence. How come there are innumerable black-on-white, black-on-Jewish, black-on-Hispanic, black-on-Arab-American, black-on-Asian crime, but relatively few white/Jewish/Hispanic/Arab-American/Asian-on-black street crime or violence? Because blacks know they are the predator and non-blacks are the prey. Lions hunt wildebeests, wildebeests do not hunt lions.

So, the oft-asked question, "was it racially motivated?" misses the point. The real question is, "is co-existence with blacks viable for non-blacks when so many blacks are dumb, aggressive, strong, violent, and filled with arrogant contempt for ‘pussy ass’ non-blacks?"
There are two solutions to this problem. One is segregation or separation of non-black races from blacks. Blacks outside US, Europe, or Canada cannot hurt whites. Jamaicans can only hurt themselves. But, when Jamaicans migrate to UK or Canada, they soon end up kicking the white boys’ ass. Since humans naturally admire and worship power–due to our evolutionary sexual and hunter-warrior instincts–, black men are soon swooned over by white women who become mudsharks having mulatto babies like Barack Obama. And even white boys brutalized and ‘pussified’ by black guys start imitating blackness because it has become the standard of alpha male toughness. Even Mexican-American gangs act and talk black. (Mexican-Americans, by their sheer numbers and lack of politically correct brainwashing, are ganging up together and scoring huge successes against blacks in parts of the Southwest. Though pound-for-pound, a black guy can easily destroy a Mexican-American, blacks have become hopelessly outnumbered by organized Mexican gangs who aren’t paralyzed by historical or social guilt regarding blacks. And, since the liberal Jewish media prop up the Grand Narrative of various peoples-of-color living in peace, the extent of hatred and distrust among blacks and the Mexican-American community has been suppressed.)

If separation or segregation is out of the question, the only other hope for some degree of racial peace is the ostracization of black violence. This has been achieved in the realm of men and women. Though men can easily beat up women, modern Western society has placed a heavy taboo against men using violence against women. Men who attack women are roundly condemned by society as brutes, bullies, a**holes, etc.. There are also laws heavily penalizing male violence against women. The combination of social, moral, and legal pressures on men has led to a great decline of violence against women in the West–at least in sane communities inhabited by mostly white folks(minus white trash folks who still get it on with their younger sisters). There are still many societies around the world where it’s socially and legally acceptable for men to beat up women. In the West, most men don’t hit women because they’ve been inculcated with the ideal that real men don’t hit women; only a bully or a coward hits the weaker or fairer sex.
It may be possible to instill this kind of taboo against black violence. Suppose society spreads the message that since blacks are stronger and can easily beat up non-blacks, it would be bullying and brutish for blacks to take advantage of their superior strength to physically or otherwise assault non-blacks. Perhaps, blacks who attack non-blacks can be shamed by society, just like men who attack women.
There is one big problem with this proposal. It can only be achieved through what might be called the pussification of the white male. For there to be a social/moral taboo against black aggression, society has to assume that white men are to black men what women are to men. The message would be black males shouldn’t attack white males because that would be like men beating up women. Such may indeed reduced the level of black violence through social ostracization–blacks who attack whites would be socially rejected as cowardly bullies who pick on weaker victims–, but the psychological toll on white men would be immense. They would have to live a pussified existence. They would be socially patronized and protected from black violence like women are socially patronized and protected from male violence. If the pussification of white male happens, even more white women will go with black men who are seen as TRUE MEN.

The option I haven’t mentioned is bio-technology. It may be possible in the not–too-distant future to genetically engineer white men who can kick the Negro’s ass. And hopefully, there may be ways to boost white gentile IQs to levels of Ashkenazi Jews or even higher. The reason why Jews dominate America is because they are smarter. The reason why blacks terrorize America is because they are stronger. All this racial equality crap is for the birds. Until the day arrives when we can find bio-technological means to improve the white race–ironically, the discoveries will most likely be made by the super-smart Ashkenazi Jews–all white people can hope for is to be properly racist. By racist, I don’t mean acting like stupid KKK or crazy Neo-Nazis. No, I mean spread the truth about race and know that we are suffering because of intellectual superiority of the Jews and physical superiority of the Negro.
There is power in numbers. There are still many whites, and if we act as a united group, we have a better chance of surviving as a proud and powerful people. The West came to dominate the world not because whites were physically the strongest nor because they were the most intelligent–Asians are comparable in terms of IQ and Ashkenazi Jews are decisively more intelligent. It was because whites found a balance between individualism and communalism, the balance between the spiritual(Judeo-Christian), sensual-creative(Euro-pagan), and rational(Hellenic). It was also because white folks stuck together.