If there is no such thing as race, how can we have “diversity?”
Bob’s Books
Bob's first book - 1976
A Plague On Both Your HousesBob's second book - 1982
THE NEW RIGHT PAPERSBob's deadliest book - 2004
Why Johnny Can't Think:
America's Professor-PriesthoodWhy Johnny Can't Think ebook zip
pwrd: Phu=9Ad5
#1 by Daniel Genseric on 06/25/2015 - 11:05 am
If ‘race is a social construct’, how can Whites be racist?
If ‘race is a social construct’, why is everyone so pissed about South Carolina’s flag?
If ‘race is a social construct’, what is all this nonsense about ‘White Privilege’?
If ‘race is a social construct’, how the HELL are we ever going to solve the so-called ‘Diversity Problem’?
Diversity is a code word for EUROPID White genocide.
#2 by RobRoy on 06/25/2015 - 5:48 pm
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2012/03/15/no-race-no-genocide/
“The name of the Genocide Treaty shows that saying race does not exist is no defense against a charge of genocide.”
#3 by time for freedom on 06/25/2015 - 8:21 pm
If White People and White countries don’t exist, then why do they need to have diversity forced on them?
#4 by Rose on 06/25/2015 - 10:13 pm
If there is no such thing as race, how do we know which countries “lack diversity?”
#5 by RobRoy on 06/25/2015 - 10:41 pm
A lateral thinking puzzle:
One social construct shoots nine social constructs in a social construct’s church. One social construct was quickly arrested and charged. How did the authorities know who to prosecute?
#6 by RobRoy on 06/25/2015 - 11:02 pm
Quick question:
Can someone tell me if anyone has ever been charged with the genocide of social constructs?
#7 by RobRoy on 06/26/2015 - 12:35 am
If there is no such thing as race, who or what is a “minority”?
#8 by eyeslevel on 06/26/2015 - 7:39 am
If race is a social construct, than celebrating diversity is celebrating a social construct?
#9 by Jason on 06/26/2015 - 8:04 am
If we force-mix all races into one single race, how can we have “diversity”?
#10 by RobRoy on 06/26/2015 - 8:32 am
They’re not force mixing all the races.
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2012/06/17/please-stop-using-mixing-the-races/
#11 by Dennis K on 06/27/2015 - 8:37 am
It is this doublethink which nearly drove me mad many many years ago when I took this Liberalism seriously.
Religions have an unwritten code.
http://www.natalt.org/2012/04/08/the-theology-of-political-correctness-the-unwritten-code/
No ideology can be taken 100% seriously and survive. The Yugoslavian band Laibach exploited this as means of subverting the state. By appearing to take the state power more seriously than the state itself, they exposed it silliness.
The article above explains this rather well, though could use more examples. I think the thesis is true, and while this has been said about systems before by Slavoj Zizek, this articles shows how Political Correctness also behaves like a religion in this respect.
Take for instance Christianity. If one was an Old + New Testament Christian, one would have to deal with the inherit contradictions in the doctrine. Do you punish gays by death or forgive? Do you follow the dietary laws? The knowledge as to which parts of the bible are to be followed, and which aren’t, is within the religion itself. These are never explicitly stated, but it is ‘understood’ by all Christians. Atheists attack Christianity by pretending to be ignorant of this. However, all Christians know which parts of the bible are Gods word, and which can be discarded, and it is this knowledge which proves their with the ingroup. These discrepancies must exist for the religion to survive.
Political Correctness works the same. It says race is real, but it cannot operate if it was to take this seriously. So transgressions to this are allowed, in specific circumstances, and it is “knowing” when these are allowed which makes one truly “Politically Correct”. If someone was to take the “race isn’t real” argument more seriously than the PC types take it. That is, at face value, much of what they advocate would fall apart. People would actually argue from a PC standpoint that diversity is unnecessary, that the idea of white guilt should be discarded because it enforces the discredited idea of ‘race’. People might even argue that genocides can’t happen.
Communism had the same thing. No one could take Marxist Socialism 100% seriously. Deviations were allowed, but like the existence of race, these remained undocumented, hidden. They were ‘understood’ but never stated. A hidden code that all true socialists understood.
#12 by -scythian- on 06/29/2015 - 5:00 pm
Here’s the Church of Political Correctness’s structure:
The golden rule is “Race Must Not Matter to You!”.
Which is inherent doublethink b/c if you insist race not matter to me then obviously race is really important to you. When you make your golden rule into law (i.e. “civil rights”), not only is race important to you, your very existence is dependent on it; or more precisely dependent on not allowing race to matter to White people.
So we have in America a constitutional amendment that is a genocidal policy, contradicts the genocide convention and the 1st amendment as well. Followed of course the very next year by its companion massive 3rd world immigration; b/c after all, if race can’t matter then Whites can’t have their own countries. And of course “defiant Europe” dutifully followed America’s wretched wretched example.
The church has two wings: liberals & respectable conservatives. Liberals adhere to the golden rule with the exception of constantly bashing Whites. Respectables adhere to the golden rule at all times so that when liberals break the rule, their kept opposition is there to reply that “race doesn’t matter” or “race shouldn’t have anything to do with it”, effectively denying our people the right to group-self-defense.
An establishment built on a heaping pile of HORSESHIT can’t be modified or updated, it has to be burned down to the ground.
#13 by Dennis K on 07/02/2015 - 4:49 am
That’s exactly it.
Liberals allow transgressions to attack Whites. Conservatives are less keen on those transgressions. Note how (at least in Australia),when it comes to indigenous rights, the CONSERVATIVES assert that race shouldn’t matter. The Liberals are allowed leeway, but the Respectables take “race isn’t real” even more seriously! They don’t allow the transgressions, but they DO always, always, stop short of pointing out its contradictions. Otherswise they would reveal the religion as silly. Such Respectables get weeded out, and rebranded as “fascists”. “Bigots”, “racists” and “nazis”.
So in this respect. the Respectable Conservatives assert the PC religion that supposedly oppose. They do this by accusing the LEFT of not being truly faithful to Liberalism, the One True Way.
Also note that no Liberal ever points out to another Liberal that race doesn’t exist, when that Liberal is arguing an anti-white perspective and assuming race isn’t real. Note that no Liberal notices this. Note that no Respectable Conservatives notices this AND sees its anti-white.