People Of Color: An Exclusionary Term

The term “people of color“ exists to distill diversity in favor of excluding one specific group.

Advertisements

The term “people of color” has gained quite a bit of popularity among the intersectional groups on the left. Now, for those of you who have studied history at any level, it should immediately strike you how similar it sounds to the old racist term “colored people”.

This term comes on the heels of a well-known group, black lives matter, pushing racial tension and even going so far as to get some colleges to segregate their dorms based on race. It’s OK to advertise events that say “no white people allowed”. It’s even OK to be deeply racist, and have it documented over the course of five years, and still get hired by the New York Times. It’s OK because it’s against white people.

See, there is a common thread these days: white people are the devil, and everybody needs to fight against it. The term people of color works to simplify that. The term doesn’t just encompass black people. “People of color” can mean black, Mexican, Asian, Indian, Native American, or Polynesian. It means anything but white. It is not an inclusive term, it is a specifically exclusive term. It allows the people of earth to combine into two teams: White, and not White.

That’s the point. That is the whole point of that term existing.

Here’s the rub: have you ever met and spent a lot of time with a Ugandan, a Kenyan, and a Jamaican? I have. The word black doesn’t even encompass those three people. There is a world of difference between those three cultures, and to boil them down to the word black would be an insult. To further boil them down to “people of color” would be far worse. To the intersectionals, though, the Ugandan and the Jamaican are exactly the same as the Chinese and the Mexican, because they are not the white devil.

On that note, you would be hard-pressed to find a Pakistani who is the same as an Iranian. Find a person from Sweden who is the same as a person from Arizona. Here’s one for you; find an Inuit who is the same as an Apache.

It is an insult to all of these people’s diverse cultures to boil them down into any sort of general language.

The sanitization and changing and generalizing of language is always used to control. They say that it is used to be inclusive, or to spare certain people’s feelings, but when it really comes down to it, it is about control.

Do not be controlled. Do not be divided. Beyond that, don’t even begin to suggest that someone from Kenya is the same thing as a Native American, other than being human.

Sarah Jeong’s Racism, and the Newspaper That Defended Her

The New York Times recently hired a prolific racist. When presented with evidence, they chose to defend her and her racism rather than do what is right. This is a five-year documentation of her racism.

The New York Times recently hired a woman named Sarah Jeong. The hiring of this woman was controversial not simply due to the woman’s impressive history of racism, but due to the fact that even when presented with evidence, the New York Times chose to defend her.

I’m sure you’re wondering, how racist could she have been? It couldn’t have been more than one or two things, or the New York Times certainly would not have hired her or defended her. Not only was it more than one or two things, it was more than one or two things spread over the course of five years.

Now, for a little backstory: her defense about this level of racism was that she was simply responding to white racists in like fashion. The mistake she made here was not deleting her Twitter before making that claim. What you are about to see is a shocking level of racism from one single person.

Let’s start with 2013.

Wow, what a trip. Pretty amazing that all that got through, right? If you’re already shocked, I recommend going and getting your pearls, because you’re about to clutch them harder than you’ve ever clutched in your life.

As we move on to 2014, you might notice that it is somewhat more voluminous than the previous year. She starts by joking about a little kid getting shot in an airport. It’s funny ’cause he’s white.

What a trip! Amazingly, her Twitter account survived that year. While 2014 was obviously the most prolific out of these years, you’ll notice that while she gets better, she doesn’t stop.

Now you may ask yourself, how does somebody go three years being so racist without anybody noticing? For your answer, I would direct you to the body of work of Tariq Nasheed. Some people just get the privilege of flying below the radar.

…Anyway, let’s move onto 2017.

Now that we have seen her secret catalog of work on the subject of race, obviously we can understand why Twitter ended up verifying her and the New York Times not only hired, but then defended her. That reason? Excellent journalism.

At this time, I would like to thank Nick Monroe for taking the six hours to dig through her profile and find all of her racist tweets. Donald Trump is pilloried for saying one or two things over the course of a number of decades. We know that Richard Spencer is a racist, yet nobody can produce an amount of evidence to show his racism to equal what is shown here about Sarah Jeong.

When Chris Rock said “it’s alright ’cause it’s all white”, he certainly didn’t have this in mind.

I suppose the question I would leave you all with is this: didn’t somebody once say that if you associate with racists that you are a racist? What sort of publication is the New York Times these days, then?

Just saying, it goes both ways.

Aneurysm in the age of Trump

So imagine this. You’re walking down the street. Maybe you’re on your way back from lunch, about to go back in to work the best job you’ve ever had. This is something you could really spend your life doing, sink your teeth into it. You are “living your best life”, as thousands of single moms on Facebook have written under their Herbalife or Younique link.

Maybe you’ve got a song in your head. “Making my way downtown, faces-”

Then you’re just dead. No transition, no fear, no last words. You don’t even get to say “ow”. One moment you’re all sunshine and roses, the next somebody’s identifying you in a morgue.

Now, when you’re looking down the barrel of something like that, how productive you think it is to sit on the Internet and argue about how Trump is the second coming of Hitler? The simple fact is, he is the president. If you are an American and part of this country, he is your president. Instead of screaming and crying about how racist he is, which he isn’t, and screaming and crying about that one time you think he mocked a disabled reporter, which he didn’t, maybe you could spare a thought for wanting him to simply come up with better policy. So far, I see a lot of people with problems, but nobody with a solution, except to go out on the street and yell “f*** Trump”.

Pro tip: that’s not actually a solution.

I see a lot of people say that things would be so much better if Hillary or Bernie had been elected. Would they? The political stage of the world would not have changed. On the surface, the world might care who the president of the United States is. When it comes right down to it, though, it doesn’t matter who the president is. Venezuela is still going down the crapper. It is doing that purely because of socialism, and Bernie Sanders would not have saved it. The situation in Guatemala that sent thousands of people north to the southern border of the United States would have happened under Hillary’s watch as well. Her press conferences in the past suggest that she probably would’ve done the exact same thing as Donald Trump dead. My question is, how many of you would be celebrating it under Hillary?

A common saying is “it is what it is”. I’ve always hated that saying because I think it can diminish the gravity of the situation. At least, I thought it did. In recent years, particularly through 2017, I am realizing that no matter what happens in any one given place, the world will continue to turn, uncaring. Just like anyone who was going to have an aneurysm and die under Trump was also going to under Hillary or Bernie.

It’s a grim prospect, I realize. To imagine that one’s fate is inevitable seems almost tantamount to nihilism. I do not believe that one’s fate is inevitable, but I do believe that some events are going to happen no matter how you prepare or fight against them. It is your reaction, however, that determines the outcome.

Now, when I said that Trump is your president whether you like it or not, I’m sure that there were at least a few of you who “lit-rally” screamed at your phone or computer that the popular vote went to Hillary and the electoral college screwed us.

Imagine this. Imagine one day we become like Sparta. We start to mock and castigate overweight people, to the point that some of them are dying directly from the hazing they are receiving, like they did in Sparta. Imagine a law being passed by popular vote that outlaws fat blue haired feminists.

It’s unconstitutional, and you don’t really get a say in it, because the popular vote won.

The electoral college exists specifically to stop that sort of mob rule from happening. It exists because at least half of the population is medically too dumb to make rational decisions. Go check it out for yourself; half the population is below a triple digit IQ. That’s kind of a big deal.

Because I love to play with hypotheticals, let’s go with another one.

Imagine if California, based on their population, got to control what happens in the rest of the United States. Within the past year alone, Jerry Brown has made it legal to give somebody AIDS without telling them. More and more cities in California are banning straws, to the point that a second offense can bring jail time. An illegal alien shoots a woman to death? No biggie. At least he didn’t give her a straw.

That is exactly why the electoral college exists. It exists because people like Jerry Brown would have far too much power without it. People who are realistically not smart enough to think more than a step ahead.

Now, if the title has the word aneurysm in it, and it started being about that subject, how did we get off on this tangent?

I suppose that I can bring it back home: when you’re finished with this, and you move on to something else, maybe you shut off your computer and go do some real life things. Maybe you just keep browsing the Internet. Maybe, however, just maybe, an aneurysm in your head bursts and you die with this still up on your screen.

Boy, that would be wacky, wouldn’t it? At least you weren’t browsing furry porn on DeviantART.

Racism on The Left

In the year 2016, when political spirits were running high and anyone associated with the Trump name was immediately called a racist, I developed a theory. My theory was that these people who were so desperate for Hillary Clinton to get into the White House were actually projecting.

Now, for those of you who don’t know, projection is a term, a psychological term, for someone who is so ashamed of an act that they are committing or so desperate to get attention away from the office that they are committing that they actually accuse someone else of the same act.

Some people will recognize this in the form of relationships. Your significant other will cheat on you, and accuse you of cheating on them.

It is truly one of the most common psychological hacks. Right up there with gaslighting.

So, the way my theory goes, the Democrat party and all of their followers have been racist since the beginning. They are attempting, however, to paint the Republican Party as racist. They are not doing this in an attempt to remove themselves from racism, but instead to distract from their own acts of racism.

Don’t believe me? You might, after watching Occupy ICE protesters in this past week.

I assure you, that while people on the right keep their mouth shut and obfuscate exit polls by not telling the truth about who they voted for, the left is becoming more bold in there racism, identity politics, totalitarianism, and fascism.

Little is hidden anymore. If you are not with them, you are against them.