Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Some perspicacious people have noticed that the European phenotype or cluster of phenotypes is disappearing. This is not in doubt. But it goes further than this. The handmaiden to this is the erasure of white culture as well, and I think the core of the matter comes down to natural preferences. White preferences are gradually being marginalised, delegitimised, and will eventually erased.

 

Like, racially speaking, generally prefers like. Most white people, given the chance, will choose white mates. Races naturally tend to segregate, as seen clearly seen in the major cities, there will be a black area, an Hispanic are, a white area, a Chinatown, a Pakistani area, sometimes even an LGBT&c area. The segregation is not hermetic and absolute, and there are bona fide multiracial areas, but it is an undeniable trend, even if the white self-segregation is carried out using code words.  "We just wanted to go to a nice neighbourhood without all the crime."  "We want to have more trees."  "We'll be near our friends."  Wiggle and squirm they are implicitly white, never explicitly.  "There's a nice black couple that moved in down the street."

 

These natural preferences for like mates, like neighbours, are opposed and attacked in the MSM. Even as the MSM caters to the white majority's preference for seeing like depicted on tv and film, it wiggles in multiracial and multicultural propaganda messages to convey that the ideal Western world is one of maximum racial, cultural, religious, sexual, gender, and linguistic diversity.  Never, note, political diversity, not legitimate political diversity.  The overly diverse politicos like Marine Le Pen and Victor Orban are not legitimate, just targets for fabricated outrage.

 

One of the latest attacks on white preference comes from the University-spawned concept of "cultural appropriation" which phrase is a tool for prying out pieces of originally-non-European culture and setting them aside as off-limits to white cultural participants.

 

Get this idea inside your mind, and you will begin to see how many words, because of the concepts associated with them, are becoming targets for cultural de-appropriation. Sometimes scientists use the word "boomerang" for example to describe the orbits of solar system bodies. Or a job seeker may employ the services of a "headhunter".  Or "too white" words like "amazon" or "jovial" or even "phlegmatic".  These words emerge in the mind like stones in a fallow field, waiting to be seized and cast aside.  They are tickets that only designated non-whites can punch.

 

This action pinches the language, and eats into the culture, causing mild ongoing paranoia to set in as one never knows when one's preferences will be tagged cultural appropriation, or even just "too white" in some way and lacking the religiously mandated "diversity".  It all smacks of a reeducation camp, with walls being built yard by yard as the allowed portion of white culture that doesn't "offend" non-whites becomes ever more niggardly, even as the option of escaping to non-white cultures become all-or-nothing.

 

Where the anti-white action will go next is hard to predict because the effort to efface whiteness evolves. Perhaps in the future even certain letters of the Alphabet will be viewed with disdain by the culture-wreckers, for whatever reason, though most likely because it reminds them of something they dislike.  Is white paper racist?  Should paper be black and text be light grey?  Or from the feminist camp, unlimited craziness potential there, what about capital B for instance, looks too much like a bosom doesn't it? Can't have that. The point is that the culturally Marxist process is there, it is eating away at the culture that whites inhabit, while ignoring non-white cultures, which are deemed constitutionally incapable of offending others.

 

This isn't to say non-white, non-male [sic] etc cultures aren't going to get knocked a bit when the host white hetero cis Christian male (whccm or "wikkum") culture is demolished, but they're not the target, you might say.  Feminists getting upset with black male culture are really in tumbleweed territory politically.  Not much happening there.  Gotta kick some whccm ass, you know.

 

What this process is doing is raising the cost of being white, so that white people are caught: their own culture is getting castrated--try asserting that Shakespeare should be required reading for Literature majors in University--but they can't adopt alien cultures because that would be cultural appropriation.  So what do they do? Drink increasingly weak tea, apparently, as they corporeally fade from existence.

 

What can be done?

 

(1) be more literate. The more dexterous we are with language the better we'll be able to counter the attacks against our preferences.  And,

(2) being aware of the current edge of thought will help us avoid being cut by them.  And,

(3) taking note of how much European culture has been appropriated without thanks balances the indignation equation, and makes the anti-appropriators look like the hypocrites they are.  And,

(4) immersing oneself in culture--not just European culture but high culture from around the world, and appropriating it with due diligence and foresight, will:

(a) improve your mind

(b) refocus the debate on high culture, and not just pop culture

© increase the potential to win allies of all races and groups, who also recognise the value of thinking on high levels, about high culture

 

What Is Cultural Appropriation and Why Is It Wrong?

 

"Susan Scafidi, a law professor at Fordham University, told Jezebel.com that it’s difficult to give a concise explanation of cultural appropriation. The author of Who Owns Culture? Appropriation and Authenticity in American Law, defined cultural appropriation as follows:

 

"“Taking intellectual property, traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, or artifacts from someone else's culture without permission. This can include unauthorized use of another culture's dance, dress, music, language, folklore, cuisine, traditional medicine [!], religious symbols, etc. It's most likely to be harmful when the source community is a minority group that has been oppressed or exploited in other ways or when the object of appropriation is particularly sensitive, e.g. sacred objects.”"

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.