What color privilege?

One of the many words used these days by the left to shut down conversation or stop people from thinking are the words "white privilege," meaning that by virtue of having white skin, white people, even little children, even poor whites or crippled ones, get special treatment. This is closely related to what is called "critical race theory," which is a supposed academic theory that laws favor whites as the dominant group and similar meanderings. That it is in anyway scientific or well thought out, as the word "theory" makes it sound, is somewhat laughable. It is, mostly just racism disguised as a theory. It is scientific in the same way as "Soviet" and "Aryan" science was.

But, I'll leave that aside for the moment and just say, of course, there can be racial bias in a society leading to one ethnic group having privileges and other groups being oppressed. And, that can include the laws being made to favor one group over the other as a method of privilege and/or oppression. In fact, the history of the United States and its predecessor colonies and territories is, like most, if not all, countries in the world for most of our collective history, one of racial privilege and oppression, including, slavery.

However, you are all aware of the expression - that was then, this is now (my favorite usage being from an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, who used a bazooka on a powerful demon who bragged to her that he was indestructible). Since the 1960s there has been a gradual improvement in the ways blacks and minorities in general were treated (really since the 1860s, but glacially slowly so as to make little improvement), and laws were bent in their favor. A quote I repeatedly rely on, because it so clearly shows the hypocrisy and falsehoods of the left, is from Barack Obama in 2016, a few years after BLM was formed and not long before Trump was elected: 

"If you had to choose one moment in history in which you could be born, and you didn’t know ahead of time who you were going to be–what nationality, what gender, what race, whether you’d be rich or poor, gay or straight, what faith you’d be born into–you wouldn’t choose 100 years ago. You wouldn’t choose the fifties, or the sixties, or the seventies. You’d choose right now. If you had to choose a time to be, in the words of Lorraine Hansberry, “young, gifted, and black” in America, you would choose right now."

He made it clear, he wasn't saying that prejudice no longer existed and talked about it too in the same speech, but it is clear that he thought, it was the best time ever for everyone. I agree. I notice he has stopped saying things like this, but, if he strays too far from the narrative, even the Great God Obama would be canceled by those whose side he's generally on. I'm sure he would say that whites are privileged and blacks oppressed, as his comments have been trending that way more and more. 

I know intelligent whites who buy into the narrative that whites are still privileged. But, it seems to be that after decades of righting the imbalances and actual privileges in society (often proved by reminding people that Obama was voted president twice in a row and the present VP is also black - 40% of all executives voted into office in the last 3 elections, almost 3 times blacks relative population). 

There can be little doubt that at this time in our history, blacks, right now, are not only not oppressed, but they are the privileged class themselves. There are many reasons to come to this conclusion. Obviously, it is not something you can experiment with or do studies on. It is opinion, of course, but I think there is a lot of support for it. 

This is driven home virtually every day to us. Seattle is teaching math as a sub-category of social justice (no, seriously). Black and white kids, and those of every other group, get to learn how whites are oppressive and blacks oppressed. Read this curriculum and cry for the children of all colors - Math SDS ES Framework.pdf (www.k12.wa.us). In Illinois, teachers are now required to teach to “culturally responsive teaching and leading” standards. If you think that means anything other than "social justice," "white privilege" and the like, start googling those words. The tv journalist Meghan Kelly pulled her two children from a private school in NYC where a letter from a blog post on how to teach white kids was circulated to be read to classes including the following:

“There is a killer cop sitting in every school where white children learn. They gleefully soak in their whitewashed history that downplays the holocaust of indigenous native peoples and Africans in the Americas. They happily believe their all-white spaces exist as a matter of personal effort and willingly use violence against black bodies to keep those spaces white.

I am tired of white people reveling in their state-sanctioned depravity, snuffing out black life with no consequences. Where the urgency for school reform for white kids being indoctrinated in black death and protected from consequences? Where are the government-sponsored reports looking into how white mothers are raising culturally deprived children who think black death is okay?” 

NYC schools has for several years focused on white privilege rather than education. I learned about 3 years ago that administrators in NYC schools were instructed that teaching about white privilege was there no. 1 concern - not actual education that might help those minorities. But, in schools all over the country Black Lives Matter Weeks have been instituted. Not white lives matter - black. In other words, kids are being taught that society doesn't appreciate black people's lives and whites are why, despite the fact that overwhelmingly, blacks are killed by other blacks. Every year. I'm not suggesting it is some violent defect in blacks at all, but that it is a product of poverty and lack of education. Not, white oppression either.

 As Hitler pointed out, “Whoever has the youth has the future.” These school districts and states seem to realize it and are in the business of proselytization. But, that's just schools. There is ample evidence of the incredible privilege of blacks in our country right now.

The idea that black lives are much more valuable than white lives is one that is becoming fixed in our culture and government despite the complete opposite being true. Here are just a few examples. In Florida, in 2013, George Zimmerman (supposedly a white man, though I think in any other circumstances, he would be considered Hispanic - see, for example - Why did New York Times call George Zimmerman ‘white Hispanic’? - The Washington Post) killed Trayvon Martin with a gun after Martin attacked him. After investigation, it was clear that Florida had no reason to prosecute a man who acted in self-defense. But, Florida, eschewing a Grand Jury which probably would not have prosecuted, did, using a rarely used privilege of a special prosecutor simply bringing charges. I watched the trial. The evidence was overwhelming from the first witness, that he acted in self-defense. The jury acquitted him because, there was literally no evidence against him. The media and advocates lashed out in anger at every prosecution witness who testified in a way that couldn't help but support the defendant - BECAUSE HE WAS INNOCENT OF A CRIME. 

Privilege - what privilege did George have? Barack Obama made said that Trayvon, not George, could have been his son, though Obama was bi-racial himself. Presumed guilty, George has been called a murderer ever since, though he was acquitted. I heard two panelists (one black, one white) on a CNN derivative proclaim that a any young black woman approached by a white male was entitled to kill him. I'm not kidding.  There is a man in jail right now who actually tried to murder George. His life has been threatened over and over from day one, he's been savaged by the fascist media. 

Not much different, although he wasn't tried, was the fate of a young white police officer, Darren Wilson, who shot and killed Michael Brown, an 18 year old black man, a bully who had just robbed a store, who threatened him and tried to take his gun. Immediately, lies about Brown putting his hands up and surrendering were spread. The federal government investigated - a federal government led by two incredibly biased men, Obama, who always leapt to the side of blacks when racial issues arouse, without the benefit of having any facts, though he was supposedly president for all of us. What did they find? Overwhelming evidence that Wilson acted in self-defense. Hence, no charges were brought against Wilson by the federal investigation, and keep in mind, this was the DOJ of Eric Holder, also black. A grand jury found likewise. Why did they even investigate and seek to prosecute him? My opinion, because he was white and Brown was of the privileged class, by benefit of his skin color. Wilson, though, had to leave his job, became unemployable, and go into hiding. Still, 5 years later. And, of course, police officers were assassinated in retaliation, and others, mostly black, died because of riots and under-policing. Does Black Lives Matter care? Of course not. They still call Wilson a murderer. Does the media care? Of course, not. BLM is given a pass on most everything. Why? My opinion. They are black and now the privileged class.

This goes on and on. I can only give a few examples. But, the Breonna Taylor, a black EMT, case is a good one to understand the process. What happened here? A tragedy no doubt. Taylor's former boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, a reputed drug dealer, used her address. Three officers, executing a legal no-knock warrant broke into her apartment while she and her new boyfriend, Ken Walker, were in bed. According to reports, Glover has said in jailhouse conversations that Taylor would hold money for him. They ran into hall, thinking Glover was invading the home, Walker firing at the officers. He hit one in the leg, nearly killing him. They fired back, killing Taylor, not Walker. 

Get it? Three cops executed a legal warrant, mistakenly believing her old boyfriend would be there. They were fired at and fired back in return. A tragedy ensued. You'd think it should be a walk away, everyone sad. So, what happens next? They were going to charge Walker with assault and attempted murder. They dropped it. Why? My opinion, because of the protests, rioting and their fear of more mayhem. But, also, because he is black and among the privileged class. The officers were not privileged. They underwent the grand jury process. Two of them, Jonathan Mattingly (who had been shot by Walker) and Myles Cosgrove, were not indicted, ironically, the ones who hit and killed Taylor. The third, though, Brett Hankinson, was charged with reckless endangerment, because his bullets passed into the next apartment. How does it make sense that a police officer, being fired upon cannot fire back, particularly as he cannot see anyone else who might be harmed? It doesn't make sense, but they needed a sacrifice and a white man to be it. Why would that be if whites were privileged?

Meanwhile, Kentucky has settled the Breonna Taylor civil wrongful death case for 12 million dollars. I'm sorry she's dead, even if it is true that she facilitated in a drug business.  But, if the cops killed me, my family wouldn't be given millions of dollars. They would get very little. The truth is, the municipalities always seem to want to appease the rioters (both blacks and whites). Forget about the fact that this appeasement never works with BLM or its adherents of whatever color - they keep trying. George Floyd, a drug addict and convicted felon (including home invasion with a gun) got $27 million. TWENTY-SEVEN. Why? His skin is black. They seemed to have named the street where he was killed after him? Why aren't streets named after whites who are killed, even wrongfully, by cops? The answer is - skin color. The opposite of what Martin Luther King, Jr., preached and dreamed about.

Probably the tragedy at the Capitol building on January 6th shows the difference between being white and black privilege right now. During the unarmed, that is - no guns - protest, which was violent only against property (which, BLM says is okay), and where it turns out the protesters didn't kill anyone (the FBI will not say how Officer Sicknick died, so I have to presume it had nothing to do with the protesters, for now). But, one officer there did take aim, and shot and killed - an obvious murder -Ashli Babbitt, who, though part of a violent encroachment of which I don't approve, was in an area completely surrounded by other armed cops who were doing their best not to kill anyone. The officer who shot her clearly endangered everyone in the area. Had he hit a cop (I guess we have to congratulate her on her aim), the other cops might have mistakenly opened fire at the crowd. 

So, what happens. Despite the fact that Derek Chauvin is being tried for murder (and, after watching most of the trial, I can see manslaughter for negligent homicide - there is no actual evidence of intent) for something he probably didn't intend, this woman took aim and shot a woman. If you apply the same legal standards that they are using in Chauvin - this officer would be charged immediately. Chauvin was charged in three days. Kim Potter, a 48 year old officer who recently mistook her gun for her taser and killed a young man who was resisting arrest and heading to his car where she thought he could have a gun, had to resign and was almost immediately charged with manslaughter.  What's even the name of the killer of Ashi? Do you know? We don't get to know. After deliberating for months, the DOJ decided that they didn't have enough evidence, despite the video, to bring charges. And, we don't get to know her name. 

I have to tell you, in a more perfect world, I do see why Ashli was shot. It may have saved lives. But, if you apply the standards being applied in Chauvin, the anonymous (to us) shooter is completely guilty, not only for shooting Ashli (if it was okay to kill her, why then could the police not shoot all of the trespassers or those in every rioter?), but for recklessly endangering everyone else who was there. What is the difference? Why was this woman not prosecuted where other officers are immediately prosecuted, fired or forced to resign, persecuted, even have to hide? Well, for one thing, she didn't kill a black woman. Had she, her name would be known to all of us and she'd be well into her prosecution for murder or at least manslaughter. But, the capitol riot itself is its own story and another huge indicator of black supremacy and privilege.

The Capitol Riot was predicted. It was mostly perpetrated by Trump supporters (even if there was an Antifa guy there - I don't know). Mostly white. I'm sure there were some Proud Boys and Oath Keepers there and other people with similar ideas. I wrote a post a few months ago explaining why they rioted. Essentially, it was why not? We've had a half year of violent riots by BLM and their supporters and few are arrested. Police don't kill them like they did Ashli, and people, numbed by the fascist media either think these riots are okay or outright support it, despite how many people it has killed, some in the riots, most indirectly due to the resultant under-policing. So, why shouldn't non-BLM groups think it is okay - or, if they knew they'd be treated differently, not give a damn? I'm not justifying what they did. It was wrong the same way the the BLM riots - the thousands of them, were wrong.

The other reason the officer isn't being prosecuted, is it fits the narrative of the powers that be right now. Only right wing extremists, which they make equivalent to Trump supporters, are dangerous. The others, that is, leftist extremist groups, who are far, far larger group (you notice at right wing extremist marches, they are usually greatly outnumbered by their adversaries). They are treated completely different, even by many Republicans, who seem to believe the media's Svengalis. The Proud Boys, though they don't execute cops, haven't burned down buildings or caused billions in property damages, are condemned as terrorists (I believe officially in Canada) whereas our feckless DOJ Secretary, Garland, who I used to feel sorry for), has said Antifa and the like, which does try and sometimes succeeds in murdering cops, is not considered a terrorist group by him. His excuse that the fascists (I mean Antifa) who were trying to get into the federal building in Portland for a long time by destroying the protective fence, might not be terrorists because they acted at night, brings to mind the Ku Klux Klan, who often operated at night to terrify people and keep their identity secret. Why would someone like Garland, who actually prosecuted terrorists, now shrink at calling those rightly earning the epithet by the proper name? In my view, it's because he needs to say that to keep his job with the Biden administration which is about as racist a presidency as we've had since Wilson. And Antifa is linked with BLM, and they are protected. Much of the media will not even discuss it.

Joe Biden, who I once thought a nice bumbling guy, is now racist-in-chief, claiming such things as only whites can be racist, and after the Capitol riot, said to the effect of - imagine how tough the police would have been if the rioters were black? I can imagine that. Ashli, had she been black, certainly would not have been killed, that's for sure. Brian Sickwick would not have gotten a state funeral, but probably castigated as a racist cop. If arrested, the defendants would not be convicted anymore than any of the rioters arrested during the Trump inauguration were convicted (none, out of about 500 arrester were - the prosecutors gave up trying after about 200 were acquitted by the politically biased juries - D.C., where the trials were held, is almost all black).

I could go on and on. Some of you already know these things, some of you can't accept any of it, because if you did, you'd have to recognize you've backed a party that has leaned hard into becoming fascist. I know it hurts to recognize that what you once believed was fervently right is wrong, because I've gone through it myself (a story long ago told her and which I won't repeat). And, I know, some people who read this would believe that I am a racist or white supremacist myself, or hypnotized by Donald Trump (who I never personally liked but greatly prefer to actual fascists). 

Actually, I've spent most of my life trying to learn things like why the German people took Hitler into their hearts (so we would know how not to do so) and about the civil rights struggles of blacks (the real ones, not the new fake ones like BLM) and others. And what I see is that thanks to BLMs leaders like Patrice Khan Cullors, a supposed Marxist who now apparently owns millions in real property) and Al Sharpton, as dishonest man as can be imagined, who I believe could care if a charged person is guilty or innocent, but only his skin color, have set the black communities back a generation, teaching young people that the way to success is through hate (not, as MLK taught - through loving, at least in some ways, your enemy), through rioting (don't tell me they don't accept it - they could shut it down if they wanted) and not through educating themselves. 

I don't watch tv anymore, because I won't support the fascist supporters in Hollywood. But, I don't run out of the room if someone I'm visiting turns it on. So, on New Years, I saw a BLM commercial with a march that focused on a young black girl who looked fiercely into a camera, showing that she will fight hard against the imaginary oppression against her. A little girl.

I immediately wished it had shown her studying. 

The truth is, I don't think things will improve in America or racial tensions will lesson, until all blacks (I'm sure some do) reject the self-defeating ways of the most vocal leaders. I say that realizing that there are actual racists and white supremacists out there. But, there are, in reality very few of them if you actually look at the statistics. Maybe more now than a few years ago, because, sadly, they have been energized by the political assault on whites, including the absurd lie of white privilege.

Of course, some who have read this far and are not sizzling with anger, already know that - 

-there are no laws in America which oppress blacks.

-there are many laws that favor blacks - the civil rights law, the disparate impact law*, the laws recently passed by some municipalities that give guaranteed income depending on ethnic group, laws that set aside certain government contracts are set aside for blacks and other protected classes, laws that require companies to hire blacks and other minorities.

*A 1993 federal law which holds that in United States law that allows protected classes, that is - not white males, to sue, if they believe an employment or housing law has not led to the same beneficial result for their group, even if it was not intentionally discriminatory. 

-had George Floyd been white, we wouldn't know his name and if his family had been successful in a wrongful death action it would have been given maybe a hundred or two hundred th0usand at best - certainly not 27 million or any millions.

-had white supremacists violently rioted some 500-600 times in America last year, no one would be saying they were mostly peaceful.

-that cops, particularly in urban areas, are afraid of arresting a black person, who have been now taught to resist or run, that cops are instead told to ignore most crimes committed by blacks if they can, because they will be prosecuted if they have to use force to overcome them.

-murder rates are skyrocketing in most cities because of the under-policing.

-blacks and other minorities have points added to their SAT scores.

-blacks and other minorities are favored in getting into many college even if they otherwise would not have merited it. 

-any death of a black person by cops (no matter what their own ethnicity) is now an excuse to riot for some (also, regardless of ethnicity), even if the deceased was the cause of their own demise.

-federal workers, many licensed people, are required to listen to lectures like about critical race theory or similar social justice issues.

-the media, in large, will favor narratives that benefit blacks or other groups and are detrimental to whites.

-MLK,Jr.'s dream of judging people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin is dead, if not, for those in tow of BLM, reversed.

You can even argue to me that we should have these laws described above. Certainly I'm happy for many of the anti-discrimination laws. But, they've worked, along with education, to a large extent. We have a far less racist society in America than we did in the 1960s. Even this new assault on whites, now the under-privileged class (more so men, but also women, who are denigrated as "Karens" to the BLM world), hasn't made people I know hate blacks. In fact, though I'm sure many blacks are persuaded to the themes of BLM, not all are (though they would be understandably afraid to say so). As we saw, even in the height of the George Floyd mayhem (the greatest boon to BLM ever as they could feel they finally have on video an actual case of abuse of force against a black man), most blacks wanted the same or more police - 81% of them according to a Gallup poll. Of course they do. Fascists arguing no more police, no more incarceration, are essentially gang leaders wanting no consequences for gang activities. 

You know, I never, never, never thought I'd be writing stuff like this. I was always the guy interested in civil rights, the one made fun of for being a moderate by people on both sides of the "aisle." I hate every kind of fascism, bullying and the like, no matter who is the bully and who the victim. And I was raised on many of the lies of the left. I still say thank God for the liberals, because until the last few decades, many social changes they yearned for and which were hard fought by conservatism, passed into the mainstream for the better. Not all. And now the times have changed. Even the goals of the ideologies have changed. It used to be the left that was for free speech and freedom of conscience, against censorship and preached love. Now they preach hate. If you read a speech or book by MLK,Jr., and I've read I think all of them, you will not recognize anything he believed in the dogma and exploits of BLM. 

But, when I see the world change, the media give up its values completely and support fascism, when I see the dream of MLK which most Americans have taken to hear squashed by fascists and their supporters - many of them under the pretense of being for civil rights, especially the media, when I see the left try as hard as they can to forge a one-party system and engage in the censorship, propaganda, police and media control tactics of prior fascists (whatever their denomination) - I try to have the courage to call it what it is, and that, to me fascism - trying to force policy changes by threats or violence and usually based on some claim of oppression. It's not going to happen the same this time as the last times, because the levers of power change. Nowadays, for example, Big Tech, plays an unprecedented role in censoring speech. But, in the end it will be similar, because it always leads to more coercion, more violence, more propaganda, more lies. We have progressed a great deal. But, there are essential aspects to the human drama that were the same for Adam's immediate family as they are for ours.

Make no mistake about it, BLM is based on lies, as I've written about in the past. They and the new fascists ironically calling themselves Antifa, and others who just want to riot or dismantle the country, are winning to some extent. You can see that when someone like Kyle Rittenhouse is prosecuted for defending his life by the government and the killer of Ashli Babbitt doesn't even get named. We grew out of the radicalism of the '60s. We grew out of a racist country. Will we age out of this? I don't know.