We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

The idea that someone’s skin colour should determine their politics stems from a reactionary, patronising attitude towards non-white people. It ends up producing the grim spectacle of white people telling black people what they are allowed to think. Indentitarian activists are all for empowering black people – right up until they disagree with them.

Spiked

26 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Lee Moore

    It’s also an idea whose adoption is unlikely to be particularly life enhancing for non white people in a majority white society, if the white people get to hear of it.

  • This cartoon seems fitting – https://synova.blogspot.com/2019/07/brown-voices.html

    Also there’s a meme going around Twatter and the Feces Borg that says
    “By the power of white girl, I am offended on your behalf”
    https://twitter.com/di2nu/status/1279944292413235201/photo/1
    It’s getting quite a work out these days

  • Flubber

    “white people telling black people”

    Not just a “white person”, but an uber entitled, rich Hollywood Jew.

    Looking at the polling, and specifically the increasing black support for Trump, maybe the black community doesn’t want to be told what to do any more by the media.

  • The idea that someone’s skin colour should determine their politics stems from a reactionary, patronising attitude towards non-white people.

    One would have said “from a racist attitude towards non-white people” back in the days when ‘racist’ still had a meaning in the public domain, since it asserts that only whites have the agency to choose a politics ‘against’ their skin colour (in fact, of course, very much ‘for’ their own interests as ‘against’ other whites), as well as producing

    the grim spectacle of white people telling black people what they are allowed to think

    However I quite understand why the article chose to express its meaning in synonyms.

    I’m guessing this is the real reason why Seattle government agencies now enforce segregated diversity training (h/t instapundit). Lower-status whites must not hear blacks arguing with their ‘white saviours’, nor blacks hear whites being taught that agency-less blacks must never be blamed – except for dissent from the narrative. The danger of conjoint black&white challenge to the re-educators must above all be averted: divide et impera indeed.

  • hennesli

    While I agree with the OP up to a point, to support a politics or a political party which is hostile to the ethnicity (or any other identity group) to which one belongs is not always evidence of independent thinking. Sometimes it is just evidence just willful blindness or stupidity.

    A case in point being a Jew voting for Corbyn’s Labour party. Or a Mexican/African American voting for the present day GOP.

  • JohnK

    Hennesli,

    A case in point being a Jew voting for Corbyn’s Labour party. Or a Mexican/African American voting for the present day GOP.

    A remarkably stupid point, if you don’t mind me saying so.

    Corbyn’s Labour Party was anti-semitic. The Republican Party is not against blacks or Hispanic Americans. It is against uncontrolled immigration, which reduces the economic prospects of legally resident blacks and Hispanics. Not hard to understand, is it?

  • Nullius in Verba

    “Corbyn’s Labour Party was anti-semitic.”

    It’s often said that Corbyn’s faction of the Labour Party is more anti-Israel than anti-semitic, because they’re pro-Palestinian Nationalist (who are national socialists and thus ideological allies), and as they see it, anti rich Western capitalist colonist. It’s more about the politics, not the race or religion.

    “It is against uncontrolled immigration, which reduces the economic prospects of legally resident blacks and Hispanics.”

    There’s a long-standing argument in economics about that. Is a free market economically better or worse than protectionism?

    Personally, I think the law-and-order arguments are stronger. You’ve got a democracy, so if you want society to do things differently, win the argument and change the law. Breaking the law whenever you don’t agree with it leads everyone else to do the same.

  • bobby b

    “Or a Mexican/African American voting for the present day GOP.”

    You think they should continue voting for the true racist party in America – the Democrats – who believe them all to be too lacking in intelligence to be able to succeed in society on their own? Who take them on as childish wards in exchange for political fealty and do everything possible to keep them needy and dependent?

    “A remarkably stupid point, if you don’t mind me saying so.”

    Couldn’t say it better myself.

  • JohnK

    NiV:

    I think the idea that Corbynite activists were anti-Israel rather than anti-semitic is rather tired. From the point of view of Jews being hounded out of the Labour Party, it was a distinction without a difference.

  • Nullius in Verba

    “From the point of view of Jews being hounded out of the Labour Party, it was a distinction without a difference.”

    But from the point of view of non-Jews hounded out for supporting Israel, it was a distinction that made a difference.

    The Corbynistas don’t like the West, either. They don’t like the British Empire, or those who think it was a glorious period in history. They’ll hound out anyone who says so. But it’s because of politics, not because they’re racist against the British. To a British Westerner who supports the West and Britain’s history, it’s a distinction without a difference. But Westerners who hate the West, and British people who hate the British Empire are still welcome, and ethic minorities who don’t are not. It’s about beliefs, not blood.

  • thefat tomato

    Allegedly one of the reasons for the increasing vote of African-Americans for the Republican party is, ironically, the increase in secularism amongst the African-American population, pretty much all the religious African-American leadership supporting the Democratic party.
    Any thoughts on this from the Americans here, I ask as it seems so confusing.

  • The identitarians don’t work just on color. The Left thinks it owns the GLBT populace. I got tired of it, and left – and vote against the Left every election. But I don’t do bumper stickers – there’s no need for my car to get keyed, or things like that.

  • It’s often said that Corbyn’s faction of the Labour Party is more anti-Israel than anti-semitic

    Often said by them perhaps. It’s very difficult to slide a fag paper between the protestation that “I disagree with the propaganda and policies of the Israeli government, not it’s people” and “It’s Da Jews!!!”. Sure there are some that genuinely believe the former, but many are simply disguising their antisemitism behind political camouflage.

    Given that, I have some sympathy for the Jews living in the UK saying “We keep a case packed by the door, just in case”. Given the recent rise in immigration of genuinely anti-Semitic people from countries where there is no restraint on such views, I think that their fears are reasonable and justified. I certainly can’t see the tide abating any time soon.

  • Flubber

    Given the recent rise in immigration of genuinely anti-Semitic people from countries where there is no restraint on such views, I think that their fears are reasonable and justified.

    Yes but its liberal Jews amongst others who campaign for immigration. As George Soros’s son said in an interview “Jews are more comfortable in a multicultural country”

    And as was noticed by Douglas Murray, the Jews nominally have a suitcase by the door as they have Israel to run away to; the rest of us have no such safe haven, indeed our safe haven is here.

  • bobby b

    “Sure there are some that genuinely believe the former, but many are simply disguising their antisemitism behind political camouflage.”

    While there are certainly people who dislike Jews qua Jews (thinking primarily of the ME populations), more people lately are simply rather ignorant wokesters who know only that their party says “we hates Israel” and, not understanding anything about the actual world, translate that into “we hates Jews”, and so they dutifully hate Jews. They don’t really know why, but that’s the party line, and it would make them unpopular to deviate from it.

    Ask a twenty-something progressive what Zionism is. They’ll not even come close.

  • So is someone who expresses antisemitic views but claims not to be antisemitic to be believed or not?

    I mean we can dance around the contradictions all day long, but the simplest explanations are usually the correct ones and the political camouflage is simply a front for antisemitism.

  • bobby b

    I don’t think most younger progs who are (anti-Zionist/anti-Jew/pick-one) know why they’re anti-any-one-of-the-above beyond “I’m supposed to hate them.”

    They’re just hate-sheep.

    (ETA: Of course, as I think about this more, maybe the majority of Germans in 1943 were just the same, so I’m not sure what this proves.)

  • Paul Marks

    Any black person who dares to think for themselves is told “you ain’t black” by the corrupt degenerate Joseph “Joe” Biden, with the support of the education system and the “mainstream” media.

    As for racial discrimination – the government of California SUPPORTS it (yes SUPPORTS it) as long as it is favour of black people and against white people. This is becoming a mainstream Democrat position all over America – and among the left in the wider world.

    And that utterly FAKE “conservative” Chief Justice Roberts will find some technical reason why the RASCISM of the left is fine. Just as he does with most other things the left do.

  • Flubber

    “As for racial discrimination – the government of California SUPPORTS it (yes SUPPORTS it) as long as it is favour of black people and against white people. This is becoming a mainstream Democrat position all over America – and among the left in the wider world.”

    Absolutely. The State government in CA just repealed a law that banned racial discrimination, precisely so they can target white people.

    But lets ask PDJT to disavow white supremacy one more time eh?

  • Jacob

    The classical Marxist build their strategy for grabbing power on the pretext of helping the (yet) ignorant and analphabet peasants and proletariat. They said the lower classes needed the avant-garde intellectuals to lead them.

    In the same way current neo Marxists pretend to grab power in the name of the “underprivileged minorities” – blacks and LGBT. That is: they believe the new underclass lack the brain-power or ability to take care of themselves and need the woke-liberal white-sons-of-rich-dads to grab power for them.

    (By the way: historically, Russians (Bolshevik or reactionary) were and are pretty racist.)

  • In the same way current neo Marxists pretend to grab power in the name of the “underprivileged minorities” – blacks and LGBT. That is: they believe the new underclass lack the brain-power or ability to take care of themselves and need the woke-liberal white-sons-of-rich-dads to grab power for them.

    Indeed. Just look how the woke whites go completely mental when those “underprivileged minorities” go off message. Imagine some hard working black millionaire having the temerity to complain about a 62% income tax rate and being castigated as an “Uncle Tom” or Coconut? (white on the inside).

    The absolute gall of these people.

  • as I think about this more, maybe the majority of Germans in 1943 were just the same, so I’m not sure what this proves. (bobby b, October 27, 2020 at 5:29 pm)

    Thanks for writing this and so saving me writing it as the first part of my comment on your comment – except that I would have written 1933 or a few years after but not 1943.

    In a recent post, I quoted

    When the mark rationalizes these objectively bad decisions and the cognitive dissonance that doing them causes, they nearly always rationalize themselves much further into the cult.

    When they rationalise complicity in extermination, the effect is yet stronger. In May of 1943, Germany was declared ‘Judenrein’ – just before the allied area bombing campaign started to show real results. Several things emerge clearly from the SD intelligence reports on the public mood that year.

    – Ordinary Germans knew perfectly well the Jews had been killed.

    – They interpreted the fire-storming of Hamburg and other area bombing as Jewish-ordered revenge – and it frightened them.

    – Many had a brief ‘wobble’ in late summer/early autumn 1943. The SD listeners note many an indirect or sometimes rather direct conversation hinting the impossible wish that somehow the exterminations could be walked back – so that the Germans could escape what they interpreted as their consequences.

    – Helped by Goebbels propaganda, success in handling Italy’s defection, etc., – and by their own realisation that the wish to go back was impossible – the German public overcame the momentary ‘weakness’ and their morale rose again, as they accepted the logical bind that Hitler and Goebbels had put them in.

    So, bobby b, I think you would be quite right about Germany in 1933. Ten years later, when so much more had been done, you would be wrong.

    For the same reason, cancel culture today is about the mobs who act, and the masses who silently acquiesce, as much as about the victims. You are right today, but the leaders of these movements intend to involve their followers in much more – if only they can get the power – and when much more has been done, you will be wrong.

  • For the same reason, cancel culture today is about the mobs who act, and the masses who silently acquiesce, as much as about the victims. You are right today, but the leaders of these movements intend to involve their followers in much more – if only they can get the power – and when much more has been done, you will be wrong.

    A lot of us don’t “silently acquiesce” though. Our hands are tied by laws, police and governments who are explicitly biased towards those who would destroy us.

  • bobby b

    “So, bobby b, I think you would be quite right about Germany in 1933. Ten years later, when so much more had been done, you would be wrong.”

    You’re correct about the dates.

    I think what happens is that followers and hangers-on adopt the blind prejudices of their leaders without knowing why, and act on those.

    Then, after they’ve been horrible, they begin a stronger inner rationalization of their horribleness, because they need to finally justify to themselves how horrible they have been.

    By 1943, Germans needed to passionately hate Jews because otherwise they would have to accept that they had acted inhumanly towards a people for no morally justifiable reason. Coming up with a reason for their actions after the fact saved them from condemning themselves.

    Act badly towards someone, and the easiest way to feel at ease with yourself later is to convince yourself that they deserved it.

  • In Portland as well as Seattle it seems, liberal Democrats love segregation. So what if there is a law making separate education for different races a crime – or even a ruling that says it’s unconstitutional? Brown v. Board of Education is so last century, man!

  • Jacob

    “(a) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”
    This is (the first clause of) proposition 209 adopted in California in 1996 and written into their constitution.
    Now they want to repeal that in order to make racial discrimination legal again.

    Americans ( I mean the US) are mighty racists, obssessed with racism.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>