Race War? No, A Race To The Bottom.
Black tribalism is the most powerful force in America today.
Originally, I’d planned for the contents of this essay to be part of a longer piece on the state of multicultural democracy in the West. In my ongoing struggle to publish shorter pieces, however, I made the gut-wrenching choice to break it up.
So, here we go.
Magic Words
There’s an update on the Shiloh Hendrix case:
All this, over words. Yes, they were bad words. But they were words. The Black community and their White liberal allies rarely raise this level of hell over violence among Blacks or committed by Blacks against other races. I think even they’d readily admit, at this point, that disrespecting a Black person is the most heinous crime a person can commit.
Hendrix shouldn’t have said what she said. But millions of Americans say terrible things to others daily and never face the prospect of civil or criminal charges. That’s because saying awful, hurtful things may not be a right, but it’s not a crime, either, and everyone knows it.
Minnesota-based attorney Joe Tamburino, who is not related to the case, explained hate speech doesn’t have a true definition making it illegal. A common definition of hate speech is when you say something derogatory to someone else because of their race, ethnicity, or religion.
Wait: if something cannot be given a true definition making it illegal, under what grounds can it be a crime? Laws cannot have an excess of ambiguity. That one pitfall alone makes the entire concept of “hate” speech totally invalid. It makes sense in a society where there exists no freedom of speech (a whole different can of worms), but it has no place in a society where it does.
More:
Tamburino said in order for there to be any sort of legality, it has to include some sort of fighting words.
“Our U.S. Constitution, as well as our Minnesota Constitution, protects speech. Even very negative, very harmful speech, it protects that. The only type of speech that isn’t protected against is if you had some type of violence with it or it was some type of fighting words that gets you into the disorderly conduct area,” Tamburino said.
As Tamburino explained, one can say derogatory terms. It is a right protected by the First Amendment.
However, what you cannot say, and could end up as a disorderly conduct charge, are fighting words. Fighting words are words or phrases that would likely trigger a person to react physically.
“What the police are trying to do is to see if something else has occurred, to see if there are any threats. Were there any threats of physical harm or a weapon? I’m sure that is part of the investigation, to see if there is something else besides the strong words [and the] hateful words,” Tamburino explained.
This is all legal-speak for saying that racial slurs are, at the end of the day, like any other. The distinction between racial slurs and all other kinds is arbitrary and political. The idea that racial epithets are likely to trigger a person to react physically is absurd, because rarely are any other insults given the same consideration.
If you’ll allow me to be vulgar for a moment, if someone in a supermarket walks by and calls me a “Bitch ass” for no reason (yes, this really happened to me, and he was Black), that could cause me to react violently, as I’ve been insulted without provocation. I’m not saying I would, but I’m saying that being insulted without provocation is itself a provocation.
Yet, there aren’t many jurisdictions which would consider me justified in cracking him in the face and tossing him to the ground. Our society and our legal system, for some reason, expects us to tolerate verbal abuse from others, but the line is drawn when it comes to racial, ethnic, or religious epithets, and the rules aren’t even enforced fairly across the board.
All this, over a word. All this, because a White woman said it, even as Blacks use it daily as part of their lexicon. Even if we agree it’s a terrible thing to say, the idea that this one word has so much power to the point it’s an incantation, one which summons demons and opens a portal to Hell, is an embarrassing level of superstition only a primitive society could come up with in the 21st century.
I was watching Matt Walsh’s monologue on the Hendrix incident. The entire thing is worth your time, but the following segment was what I found most meaningful. I have cued the video to the part I’m referring to; he speaks about the disingenuous nature of the outrage over Hendrix dropping the N-bomb:
If you didn’t watch the watch the video, Walsh notes that even if Hendrix had dropped the N-bomb on the supposedly five-year-old Black child at the playground, this is likely a word the Black child has heard, many, many times in his short life. We all know how ubiquitous it is in the Black community. The man filming the video has heard it many more times.
Yet, not only is this word used flagrantly among Blacks, the idea it becomes a traumatizing experience the instant a White person used it against them is preposterous. A word is either totally offensive or it’s not, and nobody, especially Blacks, should use it. If its offensiveness is contextual, then there shouldn’t be this much of a taboo against saying it. It’d be no different from any other insult.
I have a gut-wrenching feeling that Hendrix will find herself in legal trouble soon. Hate crime convictions are quite prevalent in the U.S. Even if Hendrix isn’t convicted, the process is the punishment. Forcing someone like her to navigate a legal maze to prove she’s not a racist is going to be a fight she’s going to need every last cent of the money raised via GiveSendGo in order to survive. Personally, I doubt she’ll convicted - without an accompanying physical crime to go along with it, hate speech alone rarely leads to convictions.
But it’s 2025, so never say never. Black tribalism is the most powerful force in America today. There’s no way Blacks were going to pass up the opportunity to let everyone know they’re still atop the food chain. In fact, as Dr. David Betz explained, the early stages of the coming civil war will primarily be a “dirty war.” Though he spoke primarily of state persecution of political dissidents, it can also mean state-favored identity groups using political power to go after anyone who dares offend them. That what makes the war “dirty.” It’s a gutter fight, a race to the bottom.
I wish the Hendrix family the best and hope, one day, we can defeat this society-destroying scourge.
The Inescapable Problem
It’s worth noting: though my views on race are supremely radical by normative American standards, they aren’t extreme, either. More on that later.
I know you’re probably tired of hearing it, but there’s no solution to the problem of the Black community in America. I’ll keep saying it, because Americans are either too polite to say so or are in complete denial. It needs to be said until the Overton window finally shifts to where saying so out loud is no longer taboo. It really is the most enduring problem in the country, one which will be with us even after all our problems have been solved, one which will always hold this country back.
Read the following:
The Black community’s problems are often attributed to fatherlessness and a lack of positive male role models. Yet, Black males are disproportionately criminals and are very much the source of their community’s culture of violence. Even the Black community, in rare moments of honesty, will acknowledge this. But for Blacks, their responsibility is to the race, not to society, which is why they defend them against all criticism.
X account “i/o” says about the quality of life near Black people:
We all know this. But no suburbs for me. Wherever I've gone, I've lived in older neighborhoods near the downtowns of cities.
This has meant living in very close proximity to lower-income black neighborhoods. The price you pay for this is constant vigilance, daily distant gunshots, and neighborhood chatrooms with regular news of theft and disorder and violence — none committed by people living inside our neighborhood.
But no one ever mentions who is responsible for 99% of it. No one even dares to express this reality in code. Because naming who is responsible is the worst crime of all.
This is why we can’t be like Japan. The quality of people matter. Our entire society is built not around creating greatest comfort, maximum efficiency, or safety. It’s built around accommodating minorities, but Blacks especially. The results be damned, we cannot afford to offend anyone, even if it risks our lives. The only remedy is making enough money to go live somewhere such problems don’t exist, where you can then admire Black people and immigrants from afar.
Diversity is a core value for white progressives in America and other Western countries. Over 60 percent of them support increasing immigration. As the Manhattan Institute’s Zach Goldberg shows, they are the only major part of the population to feel warmer toward other racial groups than toward their own: they rate whites as more lazy and violent, and less intelligent, than blacks. Among white progressives, 87 percent say that having an “increasing number of people of many different races, ethnic groups and nationalities” makes the U.S. a better place to live, while virtually none says that it makes the country worse.
You would think that aversion to one’s racial group would prompt white progressives to flee disproportionately white areas for more diverse ones. Surveys do show that white progressives are more likely than white conservatives to indicate that they want to live in diverse places. Studies that present Americans with showcards of stylized houses as a proxy for race —some colored white, some black, with the proportion of the latter varied—find that those with progressive racial attitudes say that they prefer more diverse places than conservatives. These findings have been replicated in Britain and the Netherlands.
But when the rubber hits the road, white liberal attitudes don’t translate into behavior.
White liberals will say their choices have nothing to do with race, while also saying their more conservative counterparts are motivated by racial animus. Frankly, it doesn’t matter. People want to live in nice, safe areas. The quality of life in an area is determined by the kind of people who live there, nothing else. If Black neighborhoods were such nice places to live, you’d think White liberals, of all people, would move there. In fact, they sometimes do, leading to gentrification, which leads to resentment among the Black population, along with increasing racial tensions. For the most part, however, White liberals don’t live in Black areas, because they don’t want to. They can deny it has anything to do with racism, but the choice is still casting an indirect judgment on the kinds of people who live in such areas.
It’s in all areas of life that you see the Black community presenting problems that make living difficult for all. Look at this incident which resulted in the termination of two Frontier Airlines employees:
Frontier is a terrible airline. They have a bad business model, which involves recruiting bad employees. Where do these bad employees come from? Furthermore, Blacks have become overrepresented all across the airline industry, including mainline carriers, due to diversity hiring efforts. This means you’re starting to see a lot of the same problems with other airlines.
I’ll attest - 20 to 30 years ago, Black employees were less problematic, at least in the airline industry, so some of this can be attributed to an overall decline in the quality of customer service. However, the more the workplace has become committed to diversity, specifically in terms of hiring Blacks, and the more our cultural norms reflect those of the Black community, the more our society as a whole will come to emulate the same kind of dysfunction.
Until something fundamentally shifts in this country, unless we have more Shiloh Hendrixes willing to take the hit on behalf of all of us, the fact is, Americans will have to either endure the abuse 13 percent of the population heaps on the country or do whatever it takes to simply not live near these people. There are currently no other options, there’s no public policy solution.
And no, we are nowhere near a breaking point. There was an incident recently where a group of Black boys brutalized a White boy at a playground [WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT]:
What was the response by the victim and his family?
Conceding that apologies might’ve been given and lessons taught, I’ll just say this: would you expect this sort of magnanimity out of Blacks? Of course you can’t, because they never do. They would treat this as an assault on the race, motivated by racism, and pursue every avenue to ensure vengeance, not merely justice. The fact is, Whites follow one script, while Blacks follow another. But as long as Whites continue to follow their script, which demands they demonstrate grace and magnanimity towards the Black community, no matter the offense, nothing will change. Abusers never become less abusive unless they’re pushed back against, violently so. They often never become less abusive, which necessitates locking them up, or ending them, permanently.
Really - whatever this event was, it culminated in the Black boy being awarded a brand-new bicycle:
Whites have no clue just how counterintuitive these gestures are. They reinforce Black narratives about themselves, about the world, and about White people. The message being sent here is that violence against Whites pays and gets rewarded. This is more than just “turning the other cheek.” It’s an invitation for more abuse. Humans learn through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement, through positive and negative incentive structures. Whatever you do, one thing you never do is reward bad behavior like this.
But like I said, Americans, Whites especially, aren’t aware of what the rules of the game really are. Until they do, we have to just keep living with this and the Regime will continue finding excuses for it all:
Not Worth The Trouble
I was weighing whether or not to share the following story and almost decided against it, because it involves someone close to me and I don’t necessarily have their permission to share this story. I’ve decided I’m going to do so, anyway, and keep things as nondescript as possible. I want to share it because I think it’ll drive home just how the problem really impacts every aspect of life.
A relation of mine works for a fairly prominent law firm. It’s committed to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), placing strong emphasis on hiring Black women. From my understanding, they have hired many Black women over the years, but they don’t last very long in the position. Practicing law is a tough line of work, so it’s not unusual for employees to not last long in the position. However, Black women in particular seem to have a hard time keeping the job.
Their latest Black female hire was no different. After just a few months, she was terminated. As a result, she should’ve turned in her company-issued work laptop, but didn’t. I’m not privy to all the details, but my guess is that she either blew it off or kept waffling after saying she’d return it. Eventually, enough was enough, and the firm needed to hire a repossession service to seize the laptop, presumably under the threat of legal action or even criminal charges. Trying to steal from a law firm is very stupid, indeed.
Why are Black women having such a hard time holding onto a job at this firm? Is it racism? You can bet the firm would forcefully battle any such accusations, citing its commitment to DEI and recruitment of Black women as exonerating evidence. Not a single person in the firm would think the problem is that they’re unconsciously racist. But even if they were, they simply wouldn’t go through the trouble of hiring them in the first place, only to fire them a short while later. Racism may be irrational, but racists aren’t.
The other possibility is that Black women in general, for whatever reason, are unsuitable for the job, at least according to the standards of the law firm. It’s the only other plausible explanation for why this one demographic has such a tough time holding down the job, even as they’re given a leg up in hiring. It shouldn’t be off-limits to say so, either. You cannot recruit for a specific demographic category and then refuse to pass judgment on the group because that would be racist and sexist.
Bad employees, bad people, come from all races. Anyone who honestly believes this shouldn’t be trying to hire people based on race, gender, or any other identity-based characteristic, then. When it comes to specifically recruiting for people like Black females to join high-powered law firms, nobody’s doing it because they actually believe racism has denied them access to some untapped talent pool. If that really were the case, the results would show it. But they don’t.
Anyone who wants to debate why that is should feel most free to do so. However, nobody should place any pressure on themselves or have any pressure externally placed on them to hire someone out of a sense of guilt or social justice. Not all discrepancies in life are the result of injustice, nor is it our place to correct them. Trying to do so often leads to more harm than good.
Still, despite so many failed attempts, the law firm in the story continues its search for the elusive Black female employee who can deliver it to the promised land. Or something. It begs the question, however: if there was no social pressure to do so, if recruiting Blacks for high-status occupations wasn’t considered social responsibility, if Blacks didn’t have the ability to raise holy hell over every little grievance, would this firm go out of their way to recruit Blacks? Or would they hire exclusively for competency and suitability?
You decide.
Vox Populi
In closing, I want to share some comments in reaction to the original column on the Shiloh Hendrix case, as there were some excellent responses, along with some not-so-excellent responses, as you’ll see.
First up is
:Carl Von Clausewitz wrote in On War: “wars do not start when one people are attacked by another; wars begin when the attacked fight back.”
You end by saying that America has been in an undeclared war for sometime (you could include the West generally) and you're right in so far as ignoring Von Clausewitz’s distinction. It's been a one sided engagement thus far, but Hendrix exemplifies the change of now the attacked are fighting back. The result is the war is now beginning. The time is fast approaching when violence becomes less the monopoly of the left (BLM, ANTIFA, Pro-Palestine ) and violence is met with violence.
But lets also consider one thing in America's favor: according the Dr. Metz (the civil war expert) Trump has averted the tensions by acting as a “pressure release valve”. If that true then maybe Hendrix's actions will also be a pressure release valve too. Where whites learn to no longer take the bullying passively.
Reader is correct - a conflict only really becomes a war when both sides start shooting at each other, figuratively or literally. The race war in America has been a one-sided one, but it’s also true that Blacks believe, falsely as it might be, that America has been waging war on them since the country’s beginning. Thus, the most important factor is that one side genuinely believes in their own minds they’ve been at war this entire time. Nobody’s going to convince them, otherwise.
Hendrix’s actions may indeed relieve some of the pressure built up. However, I think the relief will only be temporary. Eventually, everyone will adjust to the new reality and what often follows is escalation, the upping of the ante. A point “Oli” later made is that power is never relinquished easily. Even if Whites and other groups continue to refuse to allow Blacks to bully and terrorize them, this may only trigger even greater defensiveness among Blacks.
Next, we’ll go to
:Sadly, I doubt this is the end of cancel culture, it’s likely an evolution of it. Perhaps in the future, the SJW group chats will sit on “damning evidence” videos, tweets etc for longer in order to construct a “cancel narrative,” then ambush someone when they’re vulnerable. The bar for accomplishing a cancellation might be harder and they might have to be pickier with their targets. At the same time, the most common victims of cancel culture were more moderate liberals/progressives who made the mistake of taking SJWs /wokes in good faith, and also not truly understanding the narrative, and thus why their random comment or action triggered massive outrage. Still, I think it’s gonna be less possible to hair trigger murder someone over one bad tweet or whatever. The actual left, even the SJW left knows this does more self harm than good and have put some effort into reforming themselves to be less self destructive.
I share his view, mostly. As I said earlier, we are a long way off from deterrence being established. It’s not enough for Blacks or anyone else trying to weaponize race to see that there’s nothing to gain from doing so. They themselves have to pay a price. Blacks are more able and willing to absorb the damage, so they’d need to suffer consequences over an extended period of time before they realize, if they ever do, that weaponizing skin color is a bad idea.
More from “Chuck:”
Tbh, while I agree with your overall post, I think for many, the Shiloh Hendrix incident was less racial and more just fatigue with canceling, and sympathy for a single mom who had insane things done to her over a word. For people like us, n-words aren’t even on the table for discussion in this, the only relevant part of the story was the doxxing, harassment, targeting employment, leaking social security numbers and posting her photos on escort sites. Absolutely NONE of this was justifiable over a word, it just wasn’t. Especially not to an obviously working class single mother. “Fighting racism” is just a false justification for digital sadism that totally absolves the sadist of any personal risk. I would say this if it was happening to a black person too, and I largely agree with you that racial tribalism is irreconcilable.
I’m inclined to agree, though I have to admit that I’m skeptical about whether there really is fatigue over cancel culture. I’m not saying the support for Hendrix isn’t motivated by that, but I’m speaking of society’s overall attitude towards cancel culture. The little research I’ve done has me discouraged; while it trends negative, it’s not resoundingly so. There are still many Americans who think cancel culture has a place in society. Stances break down along partisan lines, which is even more concerning, and even more moderate thinkers believe cancel culture to be a form of accountability.
There’s a much broader discussion to be had for another time. I do want to point out that every society ends up with an informal, extrajudicial means of holding its members accountable. It needs to. Cancel culture is basically what emerged out of the increasingly diverse, low-trust West, which cannot implement more traditional forms of accountability without running afoul of multicultural norms.
What makes cancel culture problematic is its impersonal nature: your life is destroyed by a mob comprised of people whom you’ve never met and never will. In the past, your life, even if it ended up being destroyed, was at least by those who you knew, and you could face your accusers. You were expected to. Technology has made it possible for millions of cowards to “snipe” at people from distances of hundreds, even thousands of miles away. There’s something especially cruel about this kind of informal, extrajudicial justice. Yet millions of Americans still think it has a place in our society, because, well, what’s the alternative?
Next, we’ll go to longtime reader
:Based on my experience of living in a majority Hispanic / minority white city (Tucson, AZ) and in a majority white / minority black rural area (NW Alabama), it seems that both scenarios work pretty well. What doesn't seem to work are majority black / minority white places I've lived (New Orleans, Birmingham, AL).
My home county in rural Alabama has 16,000 people and is 85% white, 14% black. Everyone mostly gets along, racial tensions are low, and the social problems endemic in the black community elsewhere are largely limited because of a lack of critical mass to (if you will) ‘catalyze’ serious problems. We have a lot of low-level crime, and illegal drug use (mostly Marijuana & alcohol) is high in our small black population, but is matched by high rates in our lower socioeconomic white population.
I, too, have seen communities comprised of Whites and Blacks which aren’t riven by dysfunction. I also think predominantly Hispanic communities are preferable to live in over even some poor White communities. Like “Austin” says, the problem is predominantly Black communities. This is similar to what’s often said about Muslims throughout the world: as a minority within a community, they’re perfectly fine. When they reach a certain percentage of a given population, however, that’s when they become a problem. Except in other communities, Blacks are a problem even when they’re a small minority.
More from Austin:
In fact, among Millennials and Gen Z, we’re seeing an increase in mixed-race relationships and childbearing. It’s common to see light-skinned children with white mothers and grandparents. (Of course, the marriage rates are tanking in the lower socioeconomic categories.)
This, too, warrants a separate discussion. But from what I’ve seen, the prevalence of interracial relationships doesn’t translate into marriages or long-term partnerships, which is where it really counts. From the data I’ve seen, there’s no sign that interracial relationships are more prevalent now than they were a decade ago, suggesting to me we’ve hit something of a ceiling when it comes to the trend. This is also more conjectural on my part, but I also think that familiarity not only breeds endearment, but contempt as well. Liberals would argue the opposite, but I think any well-meaning person would find it easier to think better of people the less you know anything about them.
This explains why White liberals, specifically those of the professional, cosmopolitan class, tend to think very highly of Blacks, despite having limited exposure to them. It also explains why Whites of a more middle-to-working-class background have a more nuanced impression of them, because they spend more time with them. If you spend enough time around anyone, you inevitably start to see both sides of them, and it’s difficult not to become more honest in your assessments of others. I once mentioned that after spending lots of time around Black people, I came to respect them more as individuals, but less as a group.
Going back to Austin’s comments, I’ll also note that when I go to Southern towns or any place with a White majority and Black minority, a common sight you see is a mixed-race child, typically White-Black, accompanied by White grandparents, invariably so. The mother is often White and is relying on her parents for daily childcare. When a parent is around, it’s usually the mother. As for the father? Who knows where he is.
Next, we go to another longtime reader,
:If you’re correct, there will come a time when whites and blacks will refuse to interact with each other. From a sitrep perspective, do you see that transition as fast or slow? Do we wake up one day and suddenly we’re shooting other races on sight?
If Whites and Blacks do refuse to interact with each other, that’d be the best possible outcome. Separation defuses conflicts; I’ll go down with the ship saying that. Forcing groups in conflict to live together in peace is a stupid idea because it doesn’t work. If even one side isn’t committed to mutual co-existence, it won’t work.
That said, I don’t think Whites and Blacks will ever refuse to interact with each other. The problem is that Blacks demand total freedom of association and movement for themselves, while also insisting on following their rules for social behavior. Refusing to interact with others implies a level of deterrence being established, an understanding that the other side won’t tolerate their behavior. That’s not going to happen as long as Blacks continue to believe the country, Whites especially, owe them something.
More from “Brian:”
This is where I think the Bosnia or Lebanon comparison breaks down, since those were religious as much as racial wars, but there are plenty of blacks who actively refuse antisocial black culture. Separation from whites would entail a huge fall in economic and social standing -- blacks will be hardest on the returning “oreos”. However, I have a hard time seeing whites willing to turn on them en-masse and “vote them off the island”. How do you see that playing out? Or are the postmodernists correct that “whiteness” is about more than skin color, so suburban blacks and whites might manage to align together (a class alliance within an underlying racial conflict)?
Which begs the question about other minorities. The Latinos are obviously the largest of these. My family having lived in Mexico, I can not see Latinos aligning with blacks. But would whites accept them? Or do they remain a separate group fighting for their own spoils?
Or is my imagination just too poor to realize how narrow race wars can really become?
Comparisons with Bosnia, Lebanon are problematic. I do employ the comparisons because they demonstrate a common theme across diverse societies that ended up in civil war: everyone got along until the shooting started. Dr. David Betz points out that diverse societies aren’t uniquely at risk of civil war, and homogeneous societies aren’t less likely to have them, either (they may in fact be at greater risk), but the point is, not only can they happen in diverse societies, when they do, your neighbors of other races and religions will not be your friends, so it almost doesn’t matter how well you get along with them today.
That said, I don’t think the factions will break down along strictly racial lines in the coming civil war. Both factions will be diverse, though the right-leaning faction will be predominantly White. The left-leaning faction will obviously be more diverse, but Whites will still constitute a large segment. White leftists believe, how ever wrongly, that they share greater kinship with non-Whites than they do with other Whites, which means if anyone’s going to engage in strict racial tribalism, it won’t be Whites. I feel the same about Hispanics and Latinos, whose vote has become increasingly split. Ideology, not race, not class, will be the real divider.
Let’s close on some of those not-so-excellent comments I referred to [WARNING: EXPLICIT CONTENT]:
Lol, you’re a cuck. And a race traitor if you’re not just Fucking Jewish.
For the record, I’m not Jewish. And I don’t believe in the crime of “race treason.” It’s a line of thinking highly prevalent in the Black community, however. As I’ve pointed out many times, the Black community is inherently far-right ethnonationalist in its worldview. They have more in common with the White supremacists/nationalists they abhor than they care to admit.
I strongly recommend you not look up the term “degloving” if you don’t already know what it is:
Max, how would you react if I degloved your hands and feet?
A couple of lessons here: no matter how extreme someone says your views are, they’re probably not. On top of that, there’s always going to be someone out there more extreme than you. Finally, you haven’t succeeded at anything in life unless you have some haters, especially if those haters hit you for not being psycho enough.
Embrace the hate!
Be Fair, But Not In Denial
We’ll finish up on this story. I’d like for it to serve as a reminder to always be fair in your assessments, no matter your political views.
Out of Fredericksburg, Virginia:
I’m not briefed up on all the facts of the case, but based on my initial impressions, I’m going to side with the resident here. Unless I’m missing something, race really has nothing to do with this. Playing pranks on anyone at 3 am is an incredibly stupid and dangerous game to play. These kids should’ve known better; you cannot play dangerously stupid games and not expect some kind of dangerously stupid prize in the end. When you’re right, you’re right. When you’re wrong, you’re wrong. Race has no impact.
However, this case unfortunately does little to de-escalate racial tensions in the country. And that’s just it - despite my unrelentingly critical opinions of the Black community, I can see past it all to be able to look at a case like the one out of Fredericksburg objectively and decide that the resident, a Black man, is innocent. Would Blacks be able to do the same if the races were reversed? I think not. They just cannot see past skin color.
Finally, here’s a reminder of how little White liberals really understand about their most favored groups:
Let’s see: Blacks are tribalistic. Hitler was tribalistic. Black politics are inherently far-right, ethnonationalist. So were Hitler’s. What’s the surprise here?
Let’s chit-chat. What are your thoughts on the Shiloh Hendrix case? Have your views changed at all, or have they stayed the same? Do you think she’ll face charges and, if so, will she be convicted? What charges do you think she could possibly face? What are your thoughts on anything else discussed here?
Share them in the comments section.
Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.
If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!
We had a family friend who was liberal and got “high on her own supply” of DEI mantras. She moved her family from an affluent white suburb to a seemingly stable black urban neighborhood. They lasted exactly three months. At the end, she had to apologize for leaving a party early because she wanted to be home before sundown as there have been “some incidents.” They moved out of state.
There’s always an easy way and a hard way for life lessons. She chose the hard way.
Remigration of blacks back to Africa is the only solution.
Normalize saying this out loud and discussing it with others.
This policy is the only logical, rational and ultimately, compassionate solution that will prevent bloodshed.
Multiculturalism has been an abysmal failure in every aspect. We must end it once and for all.