Why Do Leftists Think So Poorly of Blacks?


Some weeks ago, my friend Larry Correia wrote an article in which he defended poor people against the charge of not being able to cook, or otherwise take care of themselves. An elitist snob claimed – basically – that poor people had no choice but to buy fast food because learning to shop and cook from scratch, let alone buy the utensils necessary to the process, was an impossible ramp to climb.

Larry, who grew up, if not poor on paper, certainly not particularly well-off in reality, had lots of fun with this concept. So did all of us who read his article.

Imagine our surprise when that same day his Wikipedia entry was vandalized to identify him as a white supremacist writer. (This was doubly puzzling since Larry is, as I am, of Portuguese origin–his slightly more remote–and we are, according to the State Department, Latin.)

We–friends and fans–thought this was just a coincidence and it was some nut who otherwise hated Larry. But that day or the next, Larry got an email referencing his article and calling him a white supremacist, and we’ve reason to believe that it was the same person who vandalized his Wikipedia entry.

Now I want you to go read that article above–go ahead, I’ll wait–and tell me where Larry mentions race or says at any time that one race is superior to another.

Are you done?  Good. See, there isn’t any such thing. Larry is, in fact, defending poor people as people, and saying that they’re smart enough not to do something like, say, throw out the pan every time they cook a meal. He uses as a witness to this his mother who worked in a dollar store for a long time and saw people’s buying habits.

So, where does the “white supremacist” accusation come from?

Oh, it’s easy.

You see, the left thinks that black people–and really, anyone who can tan–are less capable, and, in fact, less human than anyone else.

This is fairly obvious if you start talking to them about things like cutting back welfare. They go from zero to calling you racist in minus ten seconds.  This makes absolutely no sense, unless they believe that most of the poor are people who can tan.

Are they?

I honestly have no idea. Perhaps they are. After all, not only has our welfare system destroyed the black family and led to children growing up without fathers (a well-known cause of poverty) but the left is importing people who can tan from south of the border by the truckload.  And since those people who can tan are usually illiterate, don’t speak functional English and also have often been lured with tales of our easy and plentiful welfare system, they are likely to be poor, at least for a while. In fact, they won’t escape poverty until they escape the leftist poverty pimps.

However, even if the majority of the poor right now are darker than the majority of those who aren’t poor, the problem of poverty is not inherently one of race, but one of a system that uses race to entrap people into poverty.

What I mean is that those of us on the right who believe welfare should be cut back believe that most of the people on it could escape poverty if only we gave them the incentive to do so.  And we believe that people of all colors could escape poverty.

The left clearly doesn’t believe so. They look at welfare, they see people who can tan drawing welfare, they jump to the conclusion that people who can tan are less mentally able, and therefore anyone refusing to redistribute wealth is racist.

This is typical of leftist projection.

Recently, in particular, I keep running into people (not me, really, as I’ve been too busy to engage in internet political arguments) being called racist for all sorts of reasons, most of all for defending the Constitution in any form.

Believe in liberty and the First and Second Amendments? Well, someone is bound to call you a white supremacist.

Believe in America and that America is the best country ever? Well, they’ll call you a white supremacist and a white nationalist.

The idea seems to be that since America was founded at a time when it was taken for granted (everywhere, really) that the races were not equally capable, then it must be that if you agree with the principles of the founding, you too are a white supremacist.

In fact, if you don’t endorse socialism and communism, they’ll call you a white supremacist. Mostly because the left are the worst ignoramuses when it comes to socialism, and it never occurs to them that while many of the non-white countries of the world have some flavor of socialism, they do so as a result of European (Soviet, mostly, really) imperialism exporting really bad ideas to the vulnerable nations of the world.

It also never occurs to the left to ask of Marx’s ideas on race either. Never mind.

In the process of throwing their weight around and calling everyone and their cat a white supremacist, it also never occurs to the left that they’re not only proclaiming that in their opinion people who tan are inferior and unable to fend for themselves, but they’re also denying those people all humanity.

I was recently at a conference where I was told that women and minority characters couldn’t be villains or even have any flaws.  They had to be portrayed as flawless innocent victims.

This, of course, means that it would make those people less than human. In the same way, if people of color are by necessity poor, unable to cook for themselves, unable to ever improve their situation, they must not be human.

This is preposterous and absurdly racist. As someone who can tan quite well, thank you, I want to thank the left for my share of the favor, but I’m not interested in their defending me or redistributing wealth in my favor.

I’m as human as they are and as capable of doing or dying on my own. As are, I believe, most poor and most minorities.

If the left just stops helping them into helplessness, they’ll do fine.

And if the left doesn’t stop calling the rest of us white supremacists, we might want to inform them that’s a mirror they’re looking into.


Happy about achieving goal of “less than 50% white authors”

 | Infowars.com – MARCH 14, 2018

Huffington Post editor Chloe Angyal is celebrating the fact that the publication successfully discriminates against white people.

Angyal, who is the deputy opinion editor for the left-wing outlet, took to Twitter to express her pride at eliminating more white people from the opinion section of the website.

“Month two of @HuffPost Opinion is almost done. This month we published: 63% women, inc. trans women; 53% writers of colour,” she wrote.

“Our goals for this month were: less than 50% white authors (check!), Asian representation that matches or exceeds the US population (check!), more trans and non-binary authors (check, but I want to do better),” added Angyal.


She went on to encourage “every other opinion page” to follow the same policy.

Respondents to the tweets weren’t so enthusiastic.

“You realize that this is discrimination, right?” asked one.

“At least you’re honest about be a racist. I’ll give you that,” remarked another.

“Chloe when are you giving up your salary and job for an intersectional person?” joked another respondent.

One wonders what Angyal is hoping to achieve by being so effusively public about discriminating against people based on their skin color.

Does she want a medal for being racist?



Compares POTUS to a slave owner

Steve Watson | Infowars.com – MARCH 13, 2018

Trump derangement syndrome persists at MSNBC, with one panelist claiming that the President’s rhetoric is so extreme that he may start using openly racist terminology at the next rally.

Appearing Monday on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” Jason Johnson, a far left political editor said Trump was “half a rally away from just using the ‘N-word.”

Johnson was referring to Trump calling Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) a “low IQ individual” at a rally in Pennsylvania this past Saturday.

“He is half a rally away from just using the ‘N-word.’ It’s that basic.” a deranged sounding Johnson exclaimed.

“He is half a rally away from just calling somebody the ‘N-word’ and then everyone is going to pretend that they’re shocked.” Johnson continued.

The panelist then claimed that “Everybody on ‘The Apprentice’ is going to say he used it all the time. That’s what he does.”

“Backstage, yes” host Chris Matthews agreed, as if the claims are true.

Referring specifically to the ongoing feud between Waters and Trump, Johnson claimed, without presenting any proof whatsoever, that the President “has a hostility and anger towards women of color.”

Johnson then suggested that unless Trump has a person of color serving him like a slave, he acts with disdain toward them.

“He’s Calvin Candie,” Johnson said, explaining to Matthews that the character was ‘the slave owner from Django’.

“That’s basically Trump,” Johnson said, adding “If she she’s not diamond and silk if she’s not Alma Rosa I can’t believe this person is talking to me.”

Johnson posted the full segment to his YouTube channel:

The war of words between Trump and Waters has been perpetuated by the Democrat, who calls for Trump to be removed from office practically every time she opens her mouth, claiming he is virulently racist.

Waters claimed that that Trump latest comments were also racist, and was backed up by The Washington Post, which published a column suggesting Trump likes to attack black women who challenge him, and there there is a historical precedent of racists linking low IQ to people of color.

Other far-left commentators made the same argument:

Screen Shot 2018-03-13 at 11.08.28 AM

Of course, Maxine Waters might just actually be dumb.