(The following dialogue between a race realist and a deluded White Liberal resulted because of a Blog post by the race realist. Read these short paragraphs and draw your own conclusions, and note the identity of the original blogger described at the bottom … but first, read the debate with my added emphases and capitalized ‘W’ for Whites – ed.)
” Why can’t the conflict between blacks and whites (or black men and white men) be both a moral issue and a struggle for power? Many Whites were and are motivated, at least in part, by a genuine moral concern for blacks – even for black men. That isn’t embarrassing. On the contrary, Whites should be proud of the noble intentions that allowed them to be taken advantage of in this way.
In fact you’re tacitly conceding that this history isn’t purely about power: the “weapons” of abolitionism, communism, liberalism and racial victim-hood that black men used to gain power could have no effect against White men unless White men have a real concern for those outside their own race. If White men didn’t really care about morality and merely wanted power, they could have killed off all black men on earth a long time ago. What is more plausible is that black men, and other nonwhites, have no real concern with those outside their own group. Post-tribal morality seems to be a White ‘thang’ that others just don’t understand.”
‘They should be proud of allowing themselves to be exploited??’ — i.e., suckered?
“I would say this sums up the mental condition of today’s White man — throughout the West. No other men would depict themselves in such a fashion, and express pride for what others would view as moral weakness, even moral degeneracy. I’d say it’s MORE than embarrassing.
‘What is more plausible is that black men, and other nonwhites, have no real concern with those outside their own group. Post-tribal morality seems to be a white thang that others just don’t understand.’
Who would want to “understand” it, if it means the decimation of their own group and the inability to protect their own women from the predation of outsiders? Again, only weird White men, attempting to find ways to explain their abnormal behavior over these past few decades, would even try to get others to understand such aberrance.
The very fact that “others just don’t understand” should give you a hint about normal human behavior, shouldn’t it? Instead, you appear to be proud of the deviance that Whites are caught up in, as if this proves that Whites have taken the moral high ground. In the competition between men in the real world, no group works to elevate another group to its own detriment. While Whites attempt to kill off their tribalism, all other tribes are strengthening their bonds. Whites may be in what you call the “post-tribal” stage, but no one else is.
“They should not be proud of being exploited, but they should be proud of having noble moral feelings that allowed them to be exploited in this way. I’m certainly not proud of the position of weakness Whites have put themselves in. But the fact that they put themselves in that position does show that they have “the moral high ground”. It is an objective truth, with good philosophical credentials, that people of all races have moral value. (I’d say that of all sentient beings, in fact.) If non-whites don’t see this, that just shows that they are less intelligent or less perceptive than Whites. It doesn’t show that there’s something “deviant” in grasping this objective moral truth. (Well, it deviates from the _statistical norm_ of human behavior, but who cares about that? I don’t want to be “normal” if that means lowering myself to the level of savages and primitives.)
Notice that when I said that a noble impulse in Whites allowed them to be suckered, “allowed” does not mean “necessitated”. Objective morality is one thing and how it’s implemented is another. It is consistent to hold a post-tribal morality and to want all non-whites removed from the west. (In fact that’s more or less what I would prefer myself.) You are conflating the two things. ”
“It’s hard to know what to say to each of your comments. They grow more pitiful with each posting. You can continue being proud of your superior moral position, as your diminishing race becomes the laughingstock of the colored world.
I understand why a White person would feel the need to adhere to the positions you espouse. There is an obvious need for many Whites to protect themselves from the truth of what has taken place during these last 30-40 years, as a clever corps of disaffected Whites intruded the alien cultures of the coloreds into mainstream society, as a method to undermine the Establishment. The job is not yet completed, but you will probably live to see its completion. I wonder if you will then be blabbing about your moral superiority.
The world will certainly be worse off without the intelligence and innovative abilities of Anglo-Euros … but, since Whites seem determined to go to their demise, so be it”.
It is consistent to hold a post-tribal morality and to want all non-whites removed from the west. (In fact that’s more or less what I would prefer myself.) You are conflating the two things.
“Oh, the fantasies we need to believe in! Of course, these two things are not possible. You either hang tough and deport aliens, and prevent new ones from coming in, without concern about their welfare in their own countries, or you weep over their fate and keep them close to your bosom. Only a strong desire for the continuation of a group’s DNA (tribal!) offers any hope for that group’s survival. As I said before, while Whites attempt to kill off their tribalism, all other tribes are strengthening their bonds.
And why do you think that Whites like you hold this “post-tribal morality,” as you call it? Could it be due to the decades of ceaseless brainwashing, via the education system and the entertainment media, targeted especially to your White mind? Do you think this might have played a part?”
Elizabeth Wright is the race realist who died in 2011. She was BLACK. >Original Source