Law Student’s Instagram Posting Triggers Debate Over Anti-White Speech

The University of Miami Law School is facing a controversy over how to handle racist comments directed against white students — with objections over a double standard at the university.  It is increasingly common to read anti-white commentary in the media, including a column recently from Elie Mystal writer for Above the Law and The Nation’s justice correspondent who lashed out at “white society” and how he strived to maintain a “whiteness free” life in the pandemic. Miami Law School has been silent in the face of complaints filed against student Jordan Gary after she posted her comments publicly on Instagram.

Gary publicly declared that she “hate[s] white people,” and noted that “People always tell me like ‘hate is such a strong word. And yes it is, but these are some strong ass stories I heard. And until I can figure out how to reconcile that in my head, and in my heart, I hate white people.”  According to her LinkedIn page, Gary is the president of the Black Law Students Association and also the writing editor for the Race & Social Justice Law Review at the university.

Conservative sites asked Miami’s Dean for a comment but there has been no public statement even after the filing of complaints.

The issue of anti-white commentary raises a subject so sensitive that few universities are willing to openly discuss it. As will come as little surprise to many on this blog, my default remains with free speech, particularly for comments made outside of a school on social media. That does not mean that schools should not denounce intolerant or racist speech.  However, these comments are bound up with an array of personal, social, and political issues for students like Gary. I would rather discuss these views than seek to punish their expression.

The free speech community is always concerned with not just the punishment of viewpoints but any differential or biased punishment.  There is little question that a white student at Miami saying that “I hate [black] people” would be immediately and publicly denounced — and likely would be immediately suspended. If there is a difference between anti-white and anti-black commentary, it should be made clear and debated.

In posting the comments, Gary was clearly inviting a public debate — a debate that might have some positive elements in getting different groups and races to think about racist assumptions as well as free speech protections.

Gary is not alone obviously in voicing such views.  Mystal’s column shows the same sweeping characterization of white people. He writes:

“Over the past year, I have, of course, still had to interact with white people on Zoom or watch them on television or worry about whether they would succeed in reelecting a white-supremacist president….Their cops aren’t hunting me when I drive through my neighborhood; their hang-ups aren’t bothering me (or threatening me) when I’m just trying to do some shopping.

…White people haven’t improved; I’ve just been able to limit my exposure to them.”

Notably, Mystal was one of the most vocal voices denouncing Nicholas Sandmann and continued to slam the wrongly accused student even after the reports of a racist incident were debunked. In the coverage of the initial coverage, Mystal’s denounced Sandmann for wearing his “racist [MAGA] hat” and objected to Sandmann doing interviews trying to defend himself. Mystal derided how this “17-year-old kid makes the George Zimmerman defense for why he was allowed to deny access to a person of color.” Putting aside the fact that Sandmann was not denying “access to a person of color,”  Mystal and Patrice were comparing this high school student to a man who was accused of murdering an unarmed African American kid and even assailing his effort to clear his name as the media continued to label him a racist.

Again, Sandmann was entirely innocent of the racism allegations and the Washington Post reached a settlement with him.

Mystal’s latest tirade however still shows that racist statements can reflect social, political, and other experiences. Mystal does concede that “not that most or even many of my interactions with white people are ‘bad.'” However, he has deep-seated feelings about how whites interact with minorities or what he views as a common sense of white privilege.  Many of these speakers are saying that their hostility is derived from experiences with racism from whites.

This brings us back to the Miami controversy and how schools should handle such disputes. One answer is that the approach should be the same regardless of whether the statements target one race or another. If there is going to be a zero tolerance for racist statements, it must be applied consistently. If not, these schools owe their students and faculty members clarity on where the line is drawn and why some racist comments are treated differently. Silence does not shoulder that burden.  We need to discuss if otherwise racist statements can be differentiated and if such differentiation constitutes tolerance for criticisms based on the race of others at a school. Likewise, there is the question of how such sweeping generalities apply to other races or other categories like gender or sexual orientation. It even ask such questions today is to risk being labeled racist or intolerant. As a result, thee is just silence and the free speech concerns go unaddressed.

Once again, I tend to oppose the regulation of speech outside of schools on free speech grounds. More importantly, I would prefer to speak freely and collectively about such deep-seated views held by students. I recognize that I hold a traditional (and perhaps dated) view of free speech. However, I still believe that the solution of bad speech is more speech, not speech regulation.


136 thoughts on “Law Student’s Instagram Posting Triggers Debate Over Anti-White Speech”

  1. The use of such terms as white and black or the other non skin colors is in and of itself racist.

  2. The question is not about free speech. The question is wether exactly the same denigration of another race should meet with equal punishment. The college should be able to set its own standards but those standards should be applied to all groups equally. You know, fair is such an outdated concept.

  3. Man, this is like the Hatfields and McCoys. Your people lynched my Great Great Grandaddy so we are going to lynch your son today. The Hatfields and McCoys were considered uneducated rubes and thousands of cartoons have been drawn to display their stupidity. It appears that many of our highly educated are not really anymore educated than the Hatfields and McCoys.

  4. Thank you for this article. My thought is you are correct it is a freedom of speech issue. However, there are two parallel justice systems established now and only one is concerned with due process, freedom of speech, facts of an alleged crime, context, utility, and justice itself.

    The parallel system is the social justice system, and it dispenses incredible and focused punishments and harms without any regard to the above; without any interest in free speech, the principle you cite.

    So, it appears this may be a war in which hypocrisy, explicit racism, administrative action, slander, and such are targeted to a group based on skin color while other groups escape judgement and are abetted and enabled in ways that previously would have been considered an egregious betrayal of the ideals of a society that judges people not on the color of skin or gender, etc,…

    My concern is that to focus on the truth of the freedom of speech issue may be to fail to recognize the truth of the preemptive punishments meted out by the social justice system, which is that it is corrupt at its core, deeply corrosive, and supremely divisive. In the social justice nuclear age, the real enemy may be war itself. Perhaps the people employing such means should be considered as the predators, criminals, accomplices, and outlaws they are. Mob rule is not a great foundation for any society.

  5. You’re crazy Johnny.

    I believe in free speech but the solution to achieving it is using the rules thrown into place by the other side BACK against them. Only when THEY start to get punished for the same racism they’re punishing others for will they ever start to defend free speech because they finally realize the frightening scenario of what it’s like to find their own speech curtailed under their own standards of what’s allowed or not.

    Saul Alinsky had it right when he said to attack the opposing army with their own tactics. Sadly only creative minds are able to see strategy well enough to realize what a brilliant tactic this is, too many other people such as yourself have no good sense of strategy and want to be conservative in the hope that through the love of god via themselves will cause their enemy to seek out change in themselves.

    You fail to see that their god is the god of State, not the one in your heaven.

  6. Whites need to realize that Blacks harbor resentment and even hatred for those of us who have a European ancestry and culture. They are enemies and we should treat them as such. Where an institution or company or governmental entity promotes this nonsense we must insist on corrective action through the courts.

    1. Imagine that you are an excessive melanin person and you read about a white cop kneeling on a black person’s neck until the black person expired, how would that make you feel about whites if not hatred?

      Of course high melanin individuals hate white people for things white people have done to them, slavery, Jim Crow, the white police killing them today.

      There is a power structure and whites have a much higher position in it and white people have greater opportunities to damage black people than black people have to damage white people. A low melanin individual calls a high melanin individual an N-word and the high melanin individual feels a frisson of fear because of relatives who were slaves and relatives who were lynched and people he/she knows who have been killed by the police. High melanin people have no equivalent insult to cause a frisson of fear for white people because whites lack the historical memories.

      I have a suggestion. Replace all US police with robots explicitly designed to hate squishy biological persons and who see all such regardless of skin melanin as potential criminals who deserve a good beating for the crime of existing. Then as many low melanin individuals will be killed by robots kneeling on their necks as befits their proportion of the population.

      White people are insufferably smug they do not acknowledge their influence on the power structure and that its purpose is to protect them mainly from black drug traders and addicts, they really believe that they have no part in the police beating, convicting and jailing any individual black person when the police know they are doing so to protect white suburbanites from the black terror. Maybe its time for Blacks to set up an organization with black robes and hoods and red crosses that hang white people by the neck from trees and burn crosses on their lawns. Among the insufferably smug of all are the commentators on the Turley blog to avoid whom I may switch to 4Chan and 8Chan.

      Yes I am woke but sometimes woke is seeing that most white people are wilfully blind to real discrimination. If the right words do not exist things can not be said. To talk about discrimination one first needs to invent the vocabulary so words like “woke” and “microaggression” are needed because before they existed the corresponding concepts were invisible and imperceptible. I recommend Turley commentators except for Natacha and Fishwings of course dip into articles about wrongful convictions of black people. The archives of Alan Bean’s “Friends of Justice Blog” are a good place to start, no link because the tag for links no longer works for me on this blog or maybe on wordpress but you can Google them. Alternatively buy Michelle Alexander’s book “The New Jim Crow Mass Incarceration In The Age of Colour Blindness……” and read one chapter a week.

      1. @Carlyle — Just a quick, passing question if I may: Which version of the Newspeak dictionary are you using to define “woke,” “microaggression,” invisible,” and “imperceptible” are you using? As I’m sure you know, the first two did not appear until the ninth, and the later two predate even version one. I admire your efforts to bring about the definitive eleventh edition. Admire and despise.

        I know you think it is doubleplus good for leftists to have so successfully changed the simple, common definitions of such a vast array of hundreds of similar words. Indeed, BB would certainly beam with pride at the forced indoctrination of doublethink. While I know you’re currently warping definitions just so you can continue in your feigned outrage, many of us recognize that the ultimate goal is the absolute same: Hate Goldstein and love BB for the sake of the Inner Party grabbing, keeping, exercise, and exceeding power and authority.

        Among 15-20 million of law enforcement interactions, 13 or so led to an officer-involved death of an “unarmed” black person last year. You’re utterly free to decide what you hate and why you hate it–even if your only criteria is melanin content. But don’t insult my intelligence by 1) projecting your hatred on half the population, and 2) spewing your idiotic “blacks are being exterminated” hyperbole as if it had any basis in reality. Yes, racism absolutely exists. It has always existed whenever two (or more) races interact, and will always continue to exist. But that is a far cry from indicting half of your fellow citizens and the entire nation’s hierarchy for actively seeking to diminish and exterminate blacks.

        And if you’re free to decide what to hate and why, then so am I. I choose the following:

        1. Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth. He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes. (1 John 2:8-11)

        2. We love because God first loved us. Whoever says, “I love God,” but hates his brother is a liar. The one who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love the God whom he has not seen. (1 John 4:19-20)

        I’m told explicitly **not** to hate, however, “There are six things the Lord hates— no, seven things he detests: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that kill the innocent, a heart that plots evil, feet that race to do wrong, a false witness who pours out lies, a person who sows discord in a family (Proverbs 6:16-19).

        Further, I understand that Christ said, “[a]nd all nations will hate you because you are my followers. But everyone who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 10:22) and “[t]hen you will be arrested, persecuted, and killed. You will be hated all over the world because you are my followers” (Matthew 24:9).

        I encourage you to step into the light.

        1. There are so many things in your post that I do not understand that I suspect communication between us is impossible, nevertheless I will give it a go.

          For 2 members of homo sapiens sapiens to communicate they have to attach the same meanings to the words they use or at least understand that they attach different meanings. Humpty Dumpty in that Lewis Carrol book when he said “words mean exactly what I say the mean nothing more nothing less” was being very wise indeed.

          In truth most words have multiple meanings attached and different users attach different meanings. For silly deluded people like me who think that “human rights” mean homo sapiens sapiens rights and wrongly believe homo sapiens sapiens individuals who are not human in the sense of being entitled to human rights are entitled to human rights “woke” means avoiding insults that are selectively insulting to homo sapiens sapiens individuals of despised and marginalized minorities because that are on the wrong side of a power relationship with the dominant powers.

          For practical no nonsense individuals like you “woke”refers to stupid, naive, impractical people who misuse the language by changing the meanings of words and inventing new words (eg microaggression”) to highlight abuse of UNPEOPLE who are not human in the sense of being entitled to human rights. It is useful to introduce some terms for these. UNPEOPLE, INFERIOR RACES, SUBHUMANS, GOD’s STEPCHILDREN are a few that I like.

          If there is no term for a concept the concept cannot be recognized when it occurs. Genocide was not recognized as a problem until the excesses of Germany during the 2nd World War. The term “ETHNIC CLEANSING” did not exist until the break up of Yugoslavia in the nineteen-nineties resulted in people of the one genetic group but of different religions liquidating each other. In 1948 the state of Israel was welcomed despite the crime of ETHNIC CLEANSING necessary for its establishment, the murder of 7,000 Palestinians and expulsion of 700,000 to result in a Jewish majority.

          Practical nononsense people like you recognize that UNPEOPLE exist and that considering them worthy of HUMAN RIGHTS is not just STUPID but EVIL. Lets list a few categories of UNPEOPLE:-

          1/ N I G G E R S;
          2/ Palestinians;
          3/ Indigenous people;
          4/ Non-Christians;
          5/ Moslems.

          In some countries such as Honduras 95% of the human population must be considered UNPEOPLE, in the USA I estimate that at most 80% of the population are entitled to be considered HUMANS and entitled to HUMAN RIGHTS.

          I hope this clarifies things.

          1. Carleton, you live in New South Wales Australia. You are a fine one to talk about immigration policies! The United States is just as entitled to defend its sovereign border as your nation of Australia.

            I would need to visit /pol/ to find a description of the Holocaust comparable to yours (I hope jonathanturley allows html for style):

            “Genocide was not recognized as a problem until the excesses of Germany during the 2nd World War”

            From the chronology of your rant above, it sounds as though you would have preferred the excesses of Germany to have been more comprehensive, thus entirely solving the problem of the founding of the State of Israel in 1948.

          2. @Carlyle I apologize for misspelling your name in my prior comment.

            By the way, I think they are referred to as MUSLIMS not moslems per your bullet point 5. If you are so fond of Palestinians, why do you deliberately misspell the adjective for people of their faith? I am glad to see that you properly spelled and capitalized Jewish 🙂

      2. Carlyle at 9:10 Am. You prefer the Louis Farrakhan brand of special hatred. I prefer the Martin Luther King vision of a special optimism. I have lived long enough to be able to compare the Jim Crow era to today. Your special hatred simply says that racism must always continue because men can never see the folly of there ways and change for the better. I prefer the easily found history that displays the changes for the better in our nation. You however are a man who has been indoctrinated to hate forever. In the South the white man declared the black man to be without redemption. Today you say that the white man is without redemption and you don’t realize that both then and now evil wears the same cape of racism. Your next thought in the progression must be that the evil in the white man must be destroyed or put to slavery because of the evil he has done. The same line of thinking was applied to the Jews in Germany. The Jews were painted with the same brush you use today. You suffer from a mental syndrome presented long ago by Socrates. “To the man afraid everything rustles”. Those who reinforce your fear are only picking your pocket. These pick pockets know it will be easy because they’ve first deadened the skin around your wallet so you won’t feel a thing. Listen, you can hear their laughter now.

        1. Correction. The quote I referenced was from Sophocles rather than Socrates. Another man of great wisdom. Perhaps Carlyle will read his works and compare them to those of Farrakhan and Salinsky.

      3. Your a hateful and sick person at present. Your path will lead you to an absolute wasteland. You’ll just waste your life and poison the lives around you. You’ll take black people backwards by telling them every problem they have is related to white people. Your absolutely no different than the people tgat did, in fact, abuse black people. Your a disease in our society and your on borrowed tine with regard to the tolerance. Many white people have had just about enough. You’d better consider that because it’s very true. Leave your person Hell and do something real with uour life. It was a gift not to be wasted like this.

    2. OA:

      Funny I interact with black folks all the time and I recall seeing this kind of resentment only twice and both times it was affluent black people. Maybe our experiences differ but I’ve been to family reunions, funerals, weddings, lots of cookouts, tailgates and was always welcomed even with my Italian-on-both sides ancestry. An occasional side-eyed glance but even then they came around. People are people when you get down to it. There are cultural differences to be sure but most everyone responds to respect, kindness, laughter and good will.

      1. Incidentally some of you may be under the impression that I am a high melanin individual. No I am not, I am a 70 year old white man in the settler colonial state of Australia and believe that the correct term for Australia’s treatment of the prior indigines is GENOCIDE.

        I have spent at least 50 years trying to turn myself into the most cynical person that I could, but all that I have achieved is REALISM.

        I believe that to some extent I understand the complaints of marginalized humans but am also sure that there is much that I can never understand because I am limited from my viewpoint of a white possessor of white privilege.

        I do not believe that a white person can be anything but an enemy of a black person and to pretend friendship is to lead to inevitable betrayal.

        What I am trying to get across is the IMPOSSIBILITY of humans communicating with different humans because of our tribal nature. Human nature is the problem and humans capable of transcending it are very few indeed. Humans divide the biological world into GOOD & EVIL. Good includes animals and plants that are beneficial to us sheep, wheat, fruit trees …… EVIL includes lifeforms that compete with us or are inconvenient to us, rats, cockroaches. This division applies to the human world as well as soon as one recognizes that another homo sapiens sapiens is different from people like us it is normal to think him or her as at least SUSPECT and more likely THE SPAWN OF SATAN.

        When White settlers in Australia r the USA exterminated the indigenous population that was NORMAL HUMAN BEHAVIOUR when Israel finally nerves itself up to implementing A FINAL SOLUTION OF THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION that also will be NORMAL HUMAN BEHAVIOUR.

        The inability to recognize normal human behaviour as normal is an insoluble problem.

        1. I do not believe that a white person can be anything but an enemy of a black person and to pretend friendship is to lead to inevitable betrayal.

          You’ve wasted 50 years of your life to arrive at a conclusion that humans are not to be judged by the content of their character, but rather by the color of their skin. 50 years and the reality of what you’ve achieved is becoming (perhaps you already were) the operational definition of RACIST.

          What I am trying to get across is the IMPOSSIBILITY of humans communicating with different humans because of our tribal nature. Human nature is the problem and humans capable of transcending it are very few indeed.

          Math was never my strong suit; but stating something is impossible and then following that up with a statement that it is possible, just doesn’t add up. Human nature is a problem if we are not able to self-govern it. Of the 7+ billion people on this planet, most would be in that category, but for regimes that need to strike fear in their subjects in order to have power over them. You are one of those subjects. What a wasted life.

        2. Carlyle, It is not the Israelis that are setting off bombs in school buses and populated areas. It is the Palestinians who have been given plenty of money to help those people. Israel didn’t force any Palestinians to leave but the Arab nations forced Jews to leave in about equal numbers or be killed. Those Jews left without their belongings but I don’t hear you talking about them.

          The legal sovereignty of Judea and Samaria is Israel’s. Multiple international laws and agreements agree with that.

          Take not the name Palestinian did not refer to the Palestinian of today. In fact around WW2 and for sometime thereafter if you read about the Palestinians they were talking about the Jews living in Israel. If you look at the last name of many Palestinians you will note the country they came from.

          If you are interested in more information and links to the legal declarations I will post them. The money western nations give to the Palestinians goes to naming streets after Palestinian families and providing the families of those suicide bombers an income greater than the average Palestinian. This promotes more bombing and a refusal to deal with reality and the law.

          Gaza was given over to the Palestinians without any pre-conditions hoping for peace, but all that did was to provide another place for Hamas to send almost daily missiles into Israel. Take note the money given to Iran went to supporting such terrorism by Hamas and Hezbolla.

          I want you to know that I have no dislike for Palestinians but their leadership takes advantage of them and the West. Take note that there is Arab home rule in those areas of Judea and Samaria (that are by law legitimate portions of Israel) where the Arabs are concentrated. Also take note that Arab Israeli citizens have the same rights as every other Israeli citizen. Arab Israeli’s serve in the Knesset and the Israeli Supreme Court. Many are in the Israeli army but are not required to serve.

          Also take note the Palestinian refugee is a political construct. There is no refugee status by the UN or elsewhere that includes future generations. Politics and Anti-Semitism has changed the meaning of words and everyone’s legal rights. Think about India and Pakistan where massive populations became refugees. There are no more (or very few) refugees still existing in that conflict or in many other areas of the world.

          1. The Palestinians are not Arabs but the descendants of the people who occupied Palestine in the 1st century AD, ie. they are mostly the descendants of Jews. Over a period of 600 odd years most converted to other religions, first Christianity in the 3rd century and later Islam in the sixth and thus to Western eyes became indistinguishable from Arabs in the surrounding areas. One minor point Arabs are semites so Israeli discrimination against Palestinians starting on the false assumption that they are Arabs is still ANTISEMITISM.

            Zionist mythology of Palestinian History has it that Rome expelled ALL JEWS and that Palestine was UNOCCUPIED DESERT for 600 years until the rise of Islam resulted in immigration from surrounding areas. In fact Rome expelled enough Jews to limit their military potential to rebel maybe 80% of them but then over the centuries their numbers increased to what the land could support.

            In 1880 when the Zionist infiltration of Palestine began there were 30,000 Jews but they were Palestinian Jews not Ashkenazi Jews. The Ashkenazi Jews were the descendants of the inhabitants of a Eurasian nation who converted in mass to Judaism. The majority population of Palestine consisted of Muslims and Christians who considerable outnumbered the native Palestinian Jews.

            In 1948 the 700,000 Palestinians fled Palestine. Zionist orthodoxy is that radio stations in surrounding Arab countries ordered them to flee to avoid inadvertently becoming human shields to the Jews the Arabs wanted to massacre. In fact they fled to avoid being killed by Jewish death squads. This did not save 7,000 of them who in fact became victim to the death squads, that is 1%. If you don’t consider it legitimate to flee when 1% of your people are murdered perhaps you can tell me what higher percentage would justify fleeing without forfeiting the rights to residence and property. Zionist mythology considers their fleeing to be a hostile act of war in cooperation with the armies of surrounding Arab states and justifies the killing of any who attempted to “return” ie “infiltrate” and the confiscation of their property”. In fact the Arab armies were responding to ETHNIC CLEANSING. What the Arab states did not realize is that while nominally in charge of Palestine British Authorities had allowed the Jews to build up militias and arsenals that outmanned and outgunned all the armies of the surrounding Arab states. In 1948 Israel invaded and conquered Palestine with the approval and cooperation of the British Empire which had ensured the Palestinians could not arm similarly.

            Had 700,000 Palestinians not been expelled the new state of Israel would have had a Palestinian majority and could not have pretended to be both JEWISH and DEMOCRATIC. ETHNIC CLEANSING was a NECESSARY PREREQUISITE for the pretence and the plan under which it was carried out was Plan D the 4th of 4 successive plans to thin the Palestinians down to a tolerable number.

            Palestinians using bombs, well GOOD ON THEM. The Palestinians are DEFEATED & CONQUERED people and TERRORISM is the only path of resistance open to them. It has not been politically effective but does signal that they HATE THE JEWS for what the JEWS have done to them but the vast majority of JEWS like other conquerors cannot see this. When the German occupiers of 2nd World War France lined members of the French Resistance up against walls and machine gunned them it was perfectly LEGAL. The members of the resistance were TERRORISTS rebelling against LEGITIMATE NAZI AUTHORITY.

            As for INTERNATIONAL LAW, only weak nations attempt to use it and strong nations such as those anglophone nations that support Israel’s right to exist on STOLEN LAND, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the USA and ISRAEL itself have no need to acknowledge its legitimacy.

            Why is the UN agency dealing with Palestinian refugees, the UNRWA different from the UN Refugee Agency that deals with other refugees including those displaced by World War II? Because ISRAEL did not want anyone to confuse the PALESTINIANS with LEGITIMATE REFUGEES like the JEWISH World War II refugees sent to Israel. The UNRWA is the UN AGENCY for refugees who are not real refugees.

            Their is an IRRECONCILABLE conflict of interest between the RIGHTS of JEWS and PALESTINIANS both cannot exist in the same universe.

            1. Carlyle, the majority of Arab Palestinians are not indigenous to Israel, the Jews are. One can ask themselves, where did the name Jew come from? Judea. It is true that the Jewish population rose and fell in the area through conquest but Israel was the home of the Jews long before Mohammed was born and long before the Ottoman Empire. That leaves us with a Semite population that you mention where some are Jews and some are not.

              There was never a king of Palestine or anything like that. In the late 19th century the total population was very small. There was mostly desert. Jews started to rebuild their ancient land. Arabs from Arab lands migrated towards productive activity. Check out the names of many Palestinians. Examples: Mugrabi from north Africa or al Masri which means Egypt.

              The name Palestinian is likely Roman in origin. You say ” they are mostly the descendants of Jews” but we already know from their names where many of them came from. We also know that it was the Jews that were called Palestinians in the earlier portions of the 20th century. That could explain some of the confusion. The Palestinians of today originate from all over the middle east. The Palestinians of the earlier part of the 20th century were Jews and they rebuilt the nation of Israel.

              Jews have been forced to migrate and they did so all over the world. They were also forced to convert which happened as well, but those that were in Israel and developed Israel when the population was very sparse were Jews.

              “In 1880 when the Zionist infiltration of Palestine began there were 30,000 Jews but they were Palestinian Jews, not Ashkenazi Jews. “

              If you wish to use numbers one has to define the geographic boundary from where those numbers arise and how those numbers were determined. No one doubts that the area was populated by Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others. You discuss Palestinian Jews as if Ashkenazi Jews were not of the same religion or were not similarly displaced and were returning to their homeland from where they initially came. The Sephardic Jew you talk about is not the Arab Palestinian of today. They were the Palestinian Jew one reads about when they talked about the development of the land today known as Israel along with their Ashkenazi counterpart.

              “In 1948 the 700,000 Palestinians fled Palestine.” *on their own accord*. Did you forget there was a war where loads of people were killed? Mechanized and organized armies from 6 Arab nations with air forces fought mostly a disorganized army with something like a 5:1 troop advantage and a home front advantage (resupply. production etc.) that amounted to numbers far greater.

              When the British left, the garrisons, and equipment were turned over to the Arabs, NOT to the Jews. The British strongly favored the Arab nations and oil keeping Jews without significant arms. Your history is reversed. The British did exactly the opposite to what you have said.

              Essentially, the initial war started with the Israelis absent heavy weaponry, tanks airplanes, etc. It was an unbalanced war greatly in favor of the Arabs that left Israel in control of a tiny area of land, mostly desert without known oil. To the British that was an unexpected result. The Arabs were left with the remainder of the British mandate many many times larger than Israel or about 80% of the land. Jordon was part of the British mandate and Israel had a boundary containing a tiny sliver of land that was unacceptable to Arab neighbors. Since then Arab, Muslim governments and terrorists have intended to drive the Jews into the sea. Anything short of that would not lead to peace. That is why settlements providing close to 100% of Arab desires were never accomplished.

              We should also take note that that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was allied with the Germans to do to the Jews in the Mideast what the Germans did to the Jews in Europe. That is exactly what you call “ETHNIC CLEANSING” only it was in the reverse and documented in writing and speeches. Thus when you talk about the deaths of people in the area remember the Arab leader in Jerusalem wanted to exterminate the Jews and linked himself with Hitler and Hitler’s support to accomplish such a task.

              Also, take note that about the same 700,000 number of Jews were thrown out of Arab lands without any of their possessions. They left on the threat of death. Where do you think they went? Those are the Palestinians you may be referring to, but they were clearly Jewish and they too built the land of Israel.

              I think your history is quite wrong and one-sided. You say: “Palestinians using bombs, well GOOD ON THEM. The Palestinians are DEFEATED & CONQUERED people”, but Jordan exists as do all the other Arab nations of the Mideast along with the predominantly Muslim nation of Iran that is not Arab. What your problem seems to be is that Jews exist at all. It seems you believe the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was right and that the Jews should not exist at all and be exterminated.

              Your understanding of why such “Palestinian” refugees exist today seems faulty as well. Whereas Israel incorporated the refugees forced from their homes from Arab lands, the Arab nations would not permit refugees to return to homes they originally came from. Instead, they armed their borders trapping refugees in specific areas creating a non-ending problem.

              One should consider what type of problem would exist today if the millions of Hindus and Muslims were displaced when India was partitioned and Pakistan and Bangladesh were created. Somehow you find the middle east problem different. For the most part that history is created by anti-Semites that tend to rewrite history. That seems to be the history you have read.

              1. We will have to AGREE to DISAGREE.

                It is I who think that your historical understanding is in fact MYTHOLOGY to be exact ZIONIST MYTHOLOGY.

                Arguing with you is futile as we live on different planets.

                1. Carlyle all that I said is well documented in audio, visual, and documents along with the people representing nations where you said they acted differently.

                  Listen to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and look at the agreements he made with Hitler for the final solution to kill all the Jews.

                  Look at the historical databases that compare the size of the armies and their abilities at the start of the war.

                  Look at the British Mandate map and see where most of the territory ended up.

                  Read the peace treaties that were never signed and see what was offered as a compromise.

                  Look at Gaza and what happened in Gaza after the Israeli’s gave up the land with no strings attached. Check out how many missiles go from Gaza into Israel meant to terrorize and kill civilian women and children. Check out the name of streets and see how they link up to the names of those that did terrorist bombings.

                  You are right. We live on different planets. On my planet, we utilize data, videos, transcripts, interviews, etc to discuss important problems. On your planet propaganda is created to provide exactly what you want to hear.

              2. @S. Meyer you are correct.
                @Carleton uh Carlyle Moulton seems to believe in that debunked myth that Jews are Khazars:

                The Ashkenazi Jews were the descendants of the inhabitants of a Eurasian nation who converted in mass to Judaism.

                No, we did not originate from central Asia!
                It is off-topic to unroll the etymology of Ashkenazi. Suffice it to say that many ANTI-Zionists indulge in the Khazaria myth in order to further justify denial of the Jewish homeland of Israel. (It even became a popular trope of the alt-right, referring to Ben Schapiro’s sister Abigail’s ample “Khazar milkers”.)

                1. Thank you Ellie. I want to make one last point based on your statement: “Suffice it to say that many ANTI-Zionists…”

                  The use of the word anti-Zionism for the most part is an attempt to hide anti-Semitism. That is something good people should recognize.

                  1. What sort of person/politician/public figure uses expressions like “…something good people should recognize” ? Give me an A! Give me a ‘u’! A ‘t’! An ‘h’!…

                    I think you get the picture. Allan excepted of course.

                    1. Anonymous, that only demonstrates your low level of intellect and knowledge.

                      Did you bother mentioning whether or not you agree with the statement “The use of the word anti-Zionism for the most part is an attempt to hide anti-Semitism? No, instead you commented in a Stupid fashion.

                      Studies have been done and it is from those studies that sentence arises.

                      You are insignificant and can’t stand it.

        3. That is not realism. Our nature can certainly become tribal but how that is defined is not set in stone. The American experiment orients the tribal spirit towards the values of all men are created equal and inalienable rights and the valuing of life and liberty. Dr. King continued channeling these value-laden perspectives of E. pluribus unum into judging people by the content of their character.

          1. “judging people by the content of their character.”

            Prairie. Dr. King had it right but others think that character is of lesser value then virtue signaling. Human nature cannot be totally reversed but it can be modified. Those that like to virtue signal don’t look for improvement rather they virtue signal and demand perfection.

            Perfection is the evil of good.

          2. If any nation is an example of rampant tribalism it is the USA.

            White yankees hate high melanin people because they always have hated them. When you do evil to people you have to hate them and fear that they will come and get some revenge. Of course white hatred of blacks is less than it was in 1850 less even than it was in 1900 and even less again than it was in 1950 but is still there and the relation between racism and its effects is not linear so the damage done by it has not decreased nearly as much.

            Consider the thought processes of Derek Chauvin keeping his knee on George Floyd’s neck for more than 9 minutes. He was AFRAID FOR HIS LIFE and for the lives of the other three police. He considered Floyd’s complaint of not being able to breathe to be resistance an attempt to get him to lift his knee so that Floyd could take an adequate breath, morph into angry evil magic big N e g r o male Incredible Hulk mode, burst out from the heap of officers throwing them 40 metres into the air. Those that didn’t die from broken necks on return to earth he would beat to death using the nearest police cruiser as a club. Note I am not making a joke this is the only possible explanation for many black deaths in custody including Floyd’s.

            I suppose sometimes humans manage to rein in their tribalism long enough to establish civilizations of reasonable size exploiting the talents disparate cultures and classes. They even construct empires but empires exploit tribalism arranging a pyramidal system of hierarchical control with each layer in the pyramid protecting the layer above from the layer below. A clever balance of fear and hope must be maintained fear of the class above but hope that it will not be too brutal. In the USA this balance is tending towards breaking point.

            Empire elites use some of the lower layers as threats to evoke fear in the middle layers. Members of the middle layers will put up with considerable oppression if they are guaranteed protection from the lower evils.

            1. “White yankees hate high melanin people because they always have hated them.”

              That is not true. That is pure tunnel vision ignorance.

              “this is the only possible explanation for many black deaths in custody including Floyd’s.”

              Of course when a black police officer acts in the same fashion to a black person being arrested you will find a useful exception for that act.

              You sound like you are immersed in extremist literature which is written to purvey specific ideas and doesn’t bother adjusting its views according to known fact. Either that, or what we have is Virtue Signaling Gone Wild..

            2. If any nation is an example of rampant tribalism it is the USA.

              Well duh. Unless you’re advocating for One World Order and no borders, this planet is already divided by nation-state “tribes.” Most of these nations have laws, customs and practices that are identifiably distinct from their neighbors. Within these nations exist additional layers of “tribes,” often with distinct borders as provinces, states, etc. Drill down further and you’ll find “tribes” of counties, cities, school districts, neighborhoods, HOA’s, Churches, ethnicities and any number of other ways people will identify. All of this “tribalism” is normal. In our nation, where we were founded as a “tribe” to equally secure the natural right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness, we have the freedom to live where we believe will provide the most security of those rights. The mass migration at our southern border is a great example of other “tribes” pursuing our “tribes” way of life. The problem for politicians is how to reach the multitude of “tribes” with one message. So they figured out a long time ago how to consolidate “tribes”; by political party. And the easiest way to populate that party “tribe” is by race/color. Economic class is another. Sex/Gender still another. Pit the parties against each other by forcing divisions among race, class and sex. Do this long enough and those things that made us a national “tribe” becomes subordinate to those things the political “tribe” has convinced their party constituents to believe. It’s reverse enlightenment theory.

              You say rampant tribalism as a bad thing. I say political tribalism is as bad as it gets.

        4. Oh man…I have *so many questions* LOL…so then, is this a convoluted explanation of your own racism? Because, according to you, it is an impossibility to overcome as it is “normal human behavior”? Let me guess, your “wokeness” somehow means you’re special and have been able to transcend that behavior?
          Are “low melanin” people the only ones not endowed with these “historical memories” you speak of? I’m also not clear on what “historical memories” are in this context…are they woven into DNA like some sort of instinct? LOL…goodness, if that’s the case then how does any individual of mixed heritage not just immediately commit suicide??
          And speaking of “low melanin” and “high melanin” and “excessive melanin”…who decides what is “excessive”…don’t you think the term “excessive” is a bit judgmental? LOL… And you are aware that the melanin count can vary immensely both within an individual and across races, right?
          Back to the “historical memories”…still wondering about these. History is like science…we study it and explore it and interpret it…and sometimes we get it wrong…but you can’t change it based on *feelings*…it is what it is and it’s best to learn from it instead of being stupid and insisting on repeating the same idiotic experiments just because you didn’t like the scientist who performed it the first time.

          1. A whole lot of SCAPEGOATING behaviours are normal for humans, racism is just one of them, others include male hatred of women (misogyny), hatred of poor people based on class and hatred of people who have the wrong supernatural beliefs.

            I am sure if you examined my beliefs you would find prejudicial hostilities that I am unaware of. WOKE people are not as WOKE as they think they are and most have a condescending attitude to the members of inferior races they pretend to support. Maybe there could be a small proportion of the human race capable of resisting scapegoating behaviours 1% 0.1% or lower, I do not claim to be one of them.

            Humans are the result of several hundred million years of evolution by natural selection. Natural selection selects for survival and only survival. One can identify two traits selected COOPERATION and WAR. Humans cooperate in much larger groups than other animals and it would be nice to imagine all humans on the planet cooperating, if you like THE KINGDOM OF GOD ON EARTH but that is impossible because some groups of humans will realize that they have the potential to organize militarily and take from another group with less military potential so the story of humanity is one colonization or invasion or enslavement after another. Notice that I don’t use the word HISTORY. History is what people write about the past, what is left out is as important as what is included and any particular historian will be writing with a particular market in mind. A lot of history is written for a dominant group in a particular nation and will not agree with history written by historians of another nation which is in conflict with the first. History for a particular nation treats that nations movers and shakers from the past excessively kindly and those of a competing nation excessively cruelly.

            There are of course revisionist historians. After events are well in the past such BLACK ARMBAND historians arise and examining documents not available earlier probably because previous historians found them irrelevant or the powerful ensured they were kept secret. In Australia our premier black armband historian is Henry Reynolds who has specialized in the study of the relationships between colonists and Australians descended from them and the indigenous people who has occupied the continent for more than 40,000 years and surprise surprise he has found that Australians did not live up to their self image of being kindly benevolent protectors of these unfortunately inferior sub-humans whose main problem was that they needed protection from their own hopeless ineptitude, rather he found evidence of massacre after massacre, cruelty after cruelty, lie after lie, theft after theft.

            If you examine the events that happened in what is now the USA since European colonization, you will find similar atrocities but most US citizens are completely unaware of them. The Europeans cooperated among themselves to make war on the indigines. They had an organizational advantage of literacy and writing and a verbal only society had no chance of standing against them in the long term.

            Any group of humans will look at another group and think is it of more benefit to us to cooperate with them or to make war on them?

            Does this answer any of your questions?

  7. It’s sad Prof. Turley would admit his views on free speech might be dated: Free speech should be timeless and absolute.

  8. I had an easier time. I took 9.5 years to finish my first Bachelor’s Degree.
    The next three were completed in 7 months.
    I just had to try everything. I’m a better person for all those classes.

  9. When Joe Biden labels Georgia’s election security measures as “Jim Crow on steroids”, he’s engaging in hyperbole every bit as divisive and unsubstantiated as anything Pres. Trump was lambasted for saying. Where is the promised improvement? Where is the attempt to unify?

    Blanket statements of hatred based on racial identity may not survive strict scrutiny when taken to Federal Court, especially when and if the person making the statement carries some imprimature of federal authority.

    At the very least, it’s up to average Americans to assert and uphold norms that frown on such public blanket statements of hatred, and to suggest trying to focus one’s grievances — giving specific and actionable negative feedback as a means to correcting what are seen as wrongs, without making it into an ad-hominem attack on an individual or group.

  10. The University of Miami is private property and its owners have a right to claim and exercise dominion over that institution without interference by government.

    Freedom of speech, thought, religion, belief, press, publication, assembly, segregation and every other conceivable, natural and God-given right and freedom per the 9th Amendment includes the freedom of opinion.

    People of a particular race may hold any opinion of people of another race and they may engage in speech expounding that opinion.

    People must adapt to the outcomes of freedom.

    Freedom does not adapt to people, dictatorship does.

  11. For four years the Democrats have complained that Trump was dividing the country. Now, with Biden in the WH, everyday we are subjected to the propaganda that whatever the Dems don’t want is either “Jim Crow,” or “systemic racism,” or “white supremacist.” The anti-white attitude of elite blacks — and I do think that “woke” toxicity is affecting the elite and not the working class — stems directly from this kind of indoctrination coming out of academia, and the Democratic Party and its followers like The Nation readers. The reason is obvious: the Dems did not win big in 2020, and they are terrified of losing their minority base to the Republicans, especially after Trump got more black and Latino votes than any other Republican president. So they’re doubling down on the “systemic racism” hoax, just as they did with the Russiagate and Ukrainegate hoaxes, to keep the race narrative alive. But by 2022, Biden will have made such a mess of things that voters won’t care about “systemic racism” anymore. Race fatigue will have set in and other issues will finally be addressed.

    1. I’ve never heard of a US President endorsing a state boycott until now. What next, Joe? Nuke Fort Benning? Biden always talks blarney while shilling for those who really want to tear the country apart.

      HE BETTER CLEAN UP HIS BS NOW. The country is in a serious situation.

  12. Parents, don’t send your children to universities that preach racism against whites, hatred for our country, or persecute or harass conservative students. You didn’t save up for 18 years to send your kid out to be brainwashed and taught group think. Is it safe for a rabid racist against whites to teach white students? Will a professor one day engage in violence, or will the bigotry lead to unfairly low grades based upon race or politics?

    Can you imagine the liability, the sheer scale of lawsuits, if a professor publicly said that she hated all white people, and then harmed a student? I mean, do we take people at their word, or not?

    Vote with your wallets and your feet or nothing will change.

    Taxpayer money should not go to universities that have essentially become Democrat propaganda machines.

    1. Karen,
      I always appreciate your well-reasoned comments. I thought you of when I read this article. It describes a new book that addresses the problem you cite in your first sentence above: The “Mind Viruses” Creating Social Justice Warriors by Gad Saad. Here is an excerpt:

      The central focus of this book is to explore another set of pathogens that are as dangerous [as biological parasites] to the human condition: parasitic pathogens of the human mind. These are composed of thought patterns, belief systems, attitudes, and mindsets that parasitize one’s ability to think properly and accurately. Once these mind viruses take hold of one’s neuronal circuitry, the afflicted victim loses the ability to use reason, logic, and science to navigate the world. Instead, one sinks into an abyss of infinite lunacy best defined by a dogged and proud departure from reality, common sense, and truth. (p. 17)

  13. There is no debate. While color bias is intrinsic, prejudice (e.g. bigotry, racism) is progressive. No more wicked solutions (i.e. Pro-Choice religion). Diversity of individuals, minority of one.

  14. Sounds like Gary can’t wait to get her first innocent White client so she can deliberately get them convicted just to act out her hate.
    If she were a doctor, one would wonder how many White patients would die under her care. Hate is not just a strong word. It is a mindset that when validated and cultivated with no consequence or or challenges by society at large, changes the person into a self elected one person judge, jury and executioner just waiting for another opportunity to justify their own hatreds existence and to make hatred for it’s own sake into the lawful and moral foundation of their life, which they then dedicate to bringing about hatred everywhere else they go. Fortunately for her, that’s now a desireable virtue taught by the highest educational institutions in the land. She’ll do fine. The victims of her infectious hatred, not so much.

  15. Woke and drowsy. Diversity dogma, not limited to racism, that denies individual dignity, individual conscience, intrinsic value, normalizes color blocs (e.g. people of white), color quotas, and affirmative discrimination. The Pro-Choice religion: one step forward, two steps backward.

    like gender or sexual orientation

    Gender is sex-correlated attributes: masculine and feminine. Then there is the transgender (i.e. state or process of divergence from normal) spectrum (e.g. homosexual).

  16. I agree with Professor Turley, perhaps even more strongly than he. I do not believe in sanctions for mere comments, no matter how odious.

    Mespo says below: “If you think a racist has some right to practice law you should by all means advocate for her admission to the bar.”

    The practice of law is governed, to a degree, by fairly clear rules of professional conduct. That is enough. Having the right attitude or set of beliefs should not be a requirement for a professional license. That is something that inevitably would be quickly abused. I think I prefer someone who is open about white hatred to someone who has it and conceals it in words but implements it in actions.

    Free speech is free speech. The runs around the Constitution and the values underlying the First Amendment by corporations and academies is abhorrent and ultimately totalitarian. As has been noted, the tendency for them to have one set of rules for one race and different sets for other races casts doubt on their integrity.

    1. Ypung:
      “The practice of law is governed, to a degree, by fairly clear rules of professional conduct. That is enough. Having the right attitude or set of beliefs should not be a requirement for a professional license. ”
      The problem of a racist lawyer is the same for a racist judge: you never know when they are putting their thumb on the scale though you suspect it always. it undermines the system needlessly. I’d never restrict a racist from saying anything but I’d likewise never ever let ’em practice law either.

      1. Mespo–I agree to some extent although once the ‘racist’ tag is allowed to disqualify someone it tends to be applied liberally and often. I doubt it would be restricted only to those who are truly racist. Look at the trouble some professors have been in for simply saying ‘All Lives Matter”.

  17. If traditional Democrats really want to do something powerful, come out against the Leftist’s within their party, the media, the universities and the race hustlers. My guess is that 75% of this country would rally around them for support, regardless of party affiliation. It would take a lot of courage, but such a move would be a positive legacy maker.

  18. The rhetoric of the Left sounds like the Nazis. I always felt such anguish whenever I read about the Holocaust, or visited a Holocaust museum. How could good people have stood by and let this happen? What was wrong with the Germans? What was wrong with the rest of the world?

    Well, we’re watching it unfold in front of our very eyes today.

    It begins with the Left falsely accusing their political opponents of being evil. Every ill caused by Democrat policies are blamed on Republicans. Simply being conservative is now considered a character flaw and moral failing. Anti-Christian rhetoric became mainstream. Putting a cross in a jar of urine was considered art, and writhing around a statue of Jesus in a black slip was avant-garde music.

    The rhetoric ramped up. Disagreeing with a black president on policy was racist. Disagreeing with Democrats meant you were racist, evil, and didn’t care about the poor. Ad hominem replaced discussion. You don’t need to defend your position if you personally attack your critic.

    Then Trump got elected, and the prejudice against conservatives exploded. You could be assaulted by modern day Brown Shirts just for leaving your house in a MAGA hat. The media aligned with Big Tech, Hollywood, and K-grad school to become Democrat propaganda and madrassas. The freest country in the world, who was on the cutting edge of banning the universal ill of slavery, was rebranded as an evil colonial empire. History was rewritten, so that the ubiquitous nature of slavery was wiped away. Only Americans practiced slavery, sold slaves, or treated other races poorly. Modern day slavery in Africa, India, and Asia are swept under the rug.

    Whites are born bad. They are the root of all ills. White Jews are branded as oppressors, too. Gee, where could that lead. BDS is mainstream. Pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli rhetoric is normalized. There are open anti-semite Democrats in Congress, like Ilhan Omar. (“It’s all about the Benjamins, baby.”) Trump, the first sitting president with a Jewish First Family, close ties to Israel, who bravely moved the embassy to Jerusalem, was absurdly labeled an anti-semite. And the obedient Democrat mob actually believed it. The same mob who supported BDS and anti-Israel rhetoric called a man with a Jewish family anti-semitic.

    Have a nuclear family, stay out of trouble, don’t do drugs, and work hard? You’re an oppressor if you’re white, and acting white if you’re black.

    Meritocracy in schools? White supremacy. Grading is bad. Tests are bad. Studying hard is white supremacy.

    Classical literature is culled because the writers were white, and the product of their times hundreds of years ago. So they’re bad and can’t possibly teach anyone anything. Iambic pentameter is white supremacy.

    Western civilization, responsible for democracy, the idea of personal freedom, and most of the technological advances of the globe – that’s colonialist and evil. (Please ignore how all cultures on Earth including Native Americans fought over land.)

    My entire gender has been reduced to a state of mind. All you have to do is feel like a woman, on any given day, and you’re a woman. You can even compete in women’s sports. Some require you to take hormones to block testosterone, but you’ve already built the body that will wipe the floor with biological women in their own sports division. Which they do. Object? Transphobe.

    School districts take it upon themselves to teach transgenderism to children. Good morning class. Do you know what defines a boy and a girl? No, it’s not their physical parts like genitalia. No, it’s not behaving in a masculine or feminine way. No, it’s not dressing a certain way. No, it’s not defined by XX and XY. No, being a different gender does not require a sex chromosome abnormality. You just “feel” like a boy or a girl, but the definition of each is up to you. Now! Who is confused about their gender now? (Everyone raises their hands.)

    The chemical and surgical castration of boys, the sterilization and mastectomies of girls, has created a frantic fad in eunuchs. If a little boy wants to run away and join the circus, his parents tell him they know better. He has to stay home until he’s 18. But if, after learning about transgenderism in his Democrat madrassa in the 4th grade, that little boy wants to be a eunuch, get castrated, take dangerous drugs to block puberty, and eventually surgically create a body cavity that will require a lifetime of specialized care and forever be at risk for infection, well, that’s his right. And any parent who interferes could lose custody. It’s between the school, your child, and the activist doctor.

    What’s “good” is the slavery of Socialism, in which you don’t own the product of your own labor and ideas and where it would be illegal to make a profit. Creating more gender dysphoria in children, with its attendant high rate of suicide, is “good.” Doing drugs is good. Fighting arrest is good. Stealing is reparations. Racism against whites is good. Bigotry against Israel is good. Beating up a Trump supporter because he wore a MAGA hat is good. Seizing city blocks and creating an “autonomous” anarchical zone with no cops allowed, and high rates of rape and murder, is good. Burning down buildings and looting businesses during a pandemic is fighting the good fight. Kamala Harris says, “Beware, because this will continue, and this should continue.” Penalizing Asians on college entrance exams and hiring practices for their race and cultural values of hard work and good study habits is good. Racist rhetoric against whites is good. Claiming that all whites are born “privileged” while ignoring the fact that so many homeless people are white men, entire towns of white people are bombed out opiod addicted hell holes, and many miserable, suicidal, unhappy, poor, or abused people are white, is “good.” Guilt and innocence is skin deep. Diversity is skin deep. No diversity of thought or skills is allowed. Democrat madrassa schools teach children to judge each other based on race. White children are bad oppressors. Black children are oppressed. If a black child got a bad grade, it must be the white child’s fault. Fights are breaking out. Kids are taunting each other. What a fabulous way to create a generation of racists. Whites will grow to resent blacks, and blacks have long been raised to resent whites.

    Through diligence, Democrats have proven that hard work does indeed pay off, as they actually create systemic racism in America. They will drag this country down until their success, deemed ill-gotten, is gone. People will be starving, trivialized by race, Balkanized, and battle over toilet paper and food.

    I’m just appalled, seeing Nazi, Lenin, and Maoist rhetoric take off. People I thought were kind and good spout Nazi sounding rhetoric, and are openly racist against whites, even though some of them ARE white. It’s like a rush to prove their valor by spouting off racist slurs against their own race. Extra points if they disparage white children.

    Name the man and they’ll find the crime.

          1. She certainly is right and you can’t stand it because to make an argument one has to have a bit more intellectual ability than you have or ever had.

            You sound like one of those bystanders that permitted the Nazi’s to do their horrors and later joined in. What a horrible person you are.

            1. Thank you for a content-free bouquet of personal attacks that takes the discussion to its lowest level.

    1. Diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment), not limited to racism. Pro-Choice religion: selective-child, selective-Jew: life deemed unworthy of life. Jew… White privilege. Planned Parent/hood, population (e.g. clinical cannibalism, medical and surgical corruption, Great Leap). Political congruence (“=”) or a Rainbow of inclusive exclusion (black, brown, white). Redistributive and often retributive change. Progress (i.e. unqualified, monotonic change): one step forward, two steps backward. Not all leftists are Nazis, Maoists, Mugabists, Mussolinis, etc. but all Nazis are leftists.

    2. For all of you who have ever watched  the documentaries of Nazi Germany with films and pictures of Jews being rounded up and beaten in the streets, Jews being piled into box cars and sent off the concentration camps, Jews being sorted into slave labor, fertilizer and lampshade categories, Jews being gassed and burned, mountains of rubbery bloated decomposing Jewish carcasses piled up, being raked through by fluid covered ghouls and “processed”, Jews being bulldozed into mass graves, Jews being rounded up and shot in the streets or shot standing over mass graves then falling in and being covered whether dead or not, lamp shades made of Jewish skin proudly displayed on Nazi officials desks and in their homes with their children standing around giggling, singing and decorating Christmas trees by the light of those lamps, photos of Nazi’s laughing and playing and picnicing with their girlfriends while acrid smoke drifted from smoke stacks in the background and wondered in stunned sickened silence
      “How in God’s Holy Name could any country, any society, any human being support, facilitate, participate in and let this happen?”
      Now you know.

      1. If you review the trajectory of Hitler’s rise, it was a rather long and well-executed process known as the slow boiled frog. He and his cohorts gradually chipped away at German Society. He would make incremental changes that were objectionable but not enough to stir up a backlash. As the Nazis accrued more power they also became more bold in their actions.

        1. Gorback, if you review the trajectory of the rise of the extreme left in our country you will see a similarity that that of Hitler’s.

          Brown Shirts, Kristallnacht etc. ; BLM Antifa rioting, taking over police stations etc.
          Book burning and cancelling people Banning and cancelling
          Control over education Control over education
          One party control One party control
          Control of the media Control of the media

          1. That was my point. The previous post posed the rhetorical question (edited for brevity) “How could this happen?” Well, that’s how it happened in Germany.

            I assumed that people would understand the analogy with today’s situation. If anyone missed it thank you for giving them a helping hand.

            Another example might be Savonarola in Florence (Bonfire of the Vanities). How do you convince all the rich people in a city to burn their possessions?

            Thie slowly boiled frog is the story arc of Animal Farm, except in the novel the pigs were the smart ones. Hitler was damn smart, as was Savonarola.

            I don’t know how today’s moronic piggies are getting this done other than the power amplification of the Internet.

            In the meantime, refuse to respond to their narratives with logic unless you’re a masochist and use the pronouns YOU choose.

            BTW why doesn’t my White Privilege allow me to use the n-word (I hate that term)? I’m a fan of Chris Rock and Dave Chapelle and that word occurs more often in 5 minutes of their act than many of us would use in a lifetime.

                  1. New anchor? I read you wrong and you was happy you cleared up my misperception. That misperception was based on something else you said in an earlier posting, but perhaps I got the names mixed up.

                    All I tried to do was acknowledge that we were on the same page because I interpreted what you said in the wrong way. Why Ollie became so excited is unknown to me.

                    1. Excited? Nah. Had you said, I’m glad you cleared that up for me., then that makes a completely different statement.

                    2. Ok everybody. ‘Nuff said. Its all good. We have other problems to solve before lunch.

                    3. Dude it’s the internet. There are no facial or voice cues that signal a joke vs an insult. People misunderstand all the time. That’s how these discussions end up with people throwing shit at each other like monkeys. Feel free to butt in to any discussion I’m in. To borrow from Thomas Jefferson, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

                    4. Of course. I certainly don’t like to contribute to that. SM and I go back a ways and he knows we share the same concerns.

                    5. Good idea Michael and thank you. You are correct here and a little further down. Olly and I have no problems.

                    6. Olly, maybe I didn’t realize my reply wasn’t sufficiently artful. But your response was more of a gotcha rather than informational.

    3. “The rhetoric of the Left sounds like the Nazis.”

      You are completely on target. I feel the same way.

    4. Karen S, I could not have said it better myself. That was not a screed but an accurate depiction of our current reality. It seems likely to be a forecast of what will follow.

    5. Absolutely spot on. I see that Anonymous chose to simply call it a “screed.” Had he the chops, he could of course try to refute any point you make. I read it a few times and your conclusions are easily supported by facts and evidence. Well done!

    6. “It begins with the Left falsely accusing their political opponents of being evil. “

      Step 1: Dehumanize the people you wish to destroy.

      “Whites are born bad. They are the root of all ills. “

      Step 2: Show how bad those people are and blame them for all your problems.

      Step 3: Ghettoize them.

      Step 4: Kill them.

Leave a Reply