It is legitimate and necessary for White American Gentiles to aspire to be governed by White American Gentiles. That is not an ideology, it is a dogma. Accept the dogma and you are on board. Reject it and you are not. If you are not a White American Gentile, there will quite possibly be ideas in this web log that could be beneficially applied to the interests of whatever other group you happen to identify with. That's fine with me -- I love everyone. But this web log is not about love, it is about governance and about the future.
I'm using the web log format to present a number of ideas I've been thinking about for while. It would be best if I could give you a well-organized essay, but I don't have the time or the facilities to do that. So I'll be discursive, I'll say what's on my mind from day to day so that if I never get around to composing my nice, coherent essay, I'll still have all the major ideas up on the web.
This current burst of activity got started about a week ago when I read an editorial in the June 8, 2008 issue of the Detroit Free Press: Racial attitudes that Obama must address by Free Press columnist Stephen Henderson, which was based on a letter sent to the Free Press in response to Sadly, race still casts significant vote BY LEONARD PITTS JR., KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS, May 28, 2008. Henderson quotes from the letter:
I do not trust black people in general, and especially black politicians. ... My overall opinion of middle-class, educated black people is that they feel superior to whites and trust only their own kind. ... I would not vote for Obama because he is inexperienced, has not earned the right to my vote, and he is black.Henderson actually went to visit the letter writer before writing his column, in which he ends up calling her a racist, a bigot and an ignorant person "haunted by racial apparitions that border on the comically absurd." Not that Henderson feels superior to the letter writer. Of course not...
A number of people also wrote to Pitts and criticized him for his criticism of white people who voted for Hillary Clinton because she is white, while not criticizing black people who voted for Obama because he is black. Pitts responded with Don't weasel out on racial truth, KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS, May 31, 2008. He writes:
I suppose the first thing that needs saying is that I have no objection to people of any marginalized ethnicity, race, religion or gender voting in a bloc for some member of their group. That's how they become less marginalized, how they win a seat at the table. The Irish did it in New York, the Cubans did it in Miami, many women are doing it now.Thing is, that's not what happened in West Virginia. Not unless you're going to tell me with a straight face that that vote reflected marginalized whites -- an oxymoron if ever there was one -- seeking a seat at the table. No, all the evidence, statistical and anecdotal, tells us those folks did not vote for Clinton because she is white; they voted against Obama because he is black. There's a difference.
All of that got me thinking. Would I ever vote for a black man for president of the USA? I'm actually not totally sure that the guy I plan on voting for is white -- if it turns out he's black, I'll still vote for him. I've read some of his articles, I like the way he thinks. He's against the war and he believes in limited government. I might vote for Thomas Sowell if he were running, but not if he is just another warmonger like McCain.
Consider this phrase from the Pitts rejoinder: "marginalized whites." First, it is not an "oxymoron" -- some white people are obviously "marginalized" according to any reasonable definition of the word. Pitts more or less admits this in a more recent article: Waiting to hear from the poor, KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS, June 14, 2008.
The problem that the majority of white people have isn't that we are "marginalized." It's that we are being dispossesed. If things continue as they are, the USA will not be our country ten, twenty, thirty or forty years from now. Most schools, colleges and universities are rooting against us. Most media outlets constantly propagandize against any kind of white consciousness. Governmental units at all levels regulate minute details of our lives and sometimes subject us to great risk for the sake of "racial justice" or whatever. We are being invaded by Mexican pesants and both major presidential candidates think that's just peachy. Both candidates are rabid supporters of Israel. Did you hear Obama's speach before the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee? He did just about everything short of karaoke-ing "I'm a Slave 4 U."
Look -- I don't want "a seat at the table." I want to own the table. But the white alternative elite to which I belong is, at this point, not even "marginal." It almost doesn't even exixt!
Back to stuff in the news: Hunting Season for Whites (Kyle Bristow, Spartan Spectator, Friday, June 6, 2008. See also the related American Renaissance discussion thread.) The article describes a rampage by a mob of 20-30 young black people against various white peoople in the Michigan town of Mount Clemens. Here is a key paragraph:
In every single article about the mob incident in which 20 to 30 black teenagers terrorized Mount Clemens, the journalists of the Macomb Daily, Detroit Free Press, and Detroit News neglected to mention the race of the perpetrators of this horrific crime spree. In every single video and picture of the perpetrators that the Macomb County Sheriff’s Office released on their website, the thugs are unsurprisingly all black.
Another news item: North Portland MAX attack renews fear, safety worries / Teens' assault of a Vancouver woman raises concerns of more trouble to come this summer (Friday, June 13, 2008, DYLAN RIVERA, The Oregonian Staff. Here is the American Renaissance Discussion Thread).
At least in the Oregonian article, the races of the perpetrators and the victim are identified. Black-on-white violence is quite common. It is often not reported by the media and when it is, significant racial details are often downplayed, only hinted at (the tell-tale phrase being "did not appear to be racially motivated") or not mentioned at all.
Obama's candidacy is a highly positive development for American white people. We get to see "behind the scenes" images of people like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pflager. We start thinking. We start talking to each other. There's enough chatter in the air so that we can actually initiate Courageous Conversations about Race -- amongst ourselves!
When we read hate-rhetoric from Leonard Pitts or Stephen Henderson, we juxtapose it with recent accounts of black-on-white violence and wonder why Henderson, for example, is so concerned about a liberal white woman's Wrong Racial Attitudes, but is silent about the horrifying mob violence of black youths against white people.
We wonder. We think. We write letters. We start blogs. We start envisioning a positive future for white people. We write manifestos.....
Yes, things are happening. 2008 is going to turn out to be one of the most amazing years in American History. All thanks to Obama!
Copyright © 2008
If you want to link to this article, try copying and pasting:
<a href="http://m3peeps.org/wfblog/intro.htm">Introducing the White Future Web Log</a>